Ram Kumar Soni v. State Of Chhattisgarh

NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPS No. 4931 of 2020 Ram Kumar Soni S/o Kapileshwar Prasad Soni Aged About 60 Years Posted As Assistant Revenue Inspector Posted At Municipal Council, Kumhari, District Durg Chhattisgarh ---- Petitioner

Versus

1. State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Secretary, Urban Administration And Development Department , Mantralaya , Mahanadi Bhawan, Atal Nagar, Nava Raipur , District Raipur Chhattisgarh

2. The Principal Secretary General Department, Mantralaya, Mahanadi Bhawan, Atal Nagar , Nava Raipur, District Raipur Chhattisgarh

3. The Director Urban Administration And Development Department, Directorate, Mantralaya, Nava Raipur, District Raipur Chhattisgarh

4. Chief Municipal Officer Municipal Council, Kumhari, District Durg Chhattisgarh ---- Respondents For Petitioner :

Mr. Praveen Dhurandhar, Advocate For State :

Mr. Rahul Jha, GA Hon'ble Shri Justice P. Sam Koshy Order on Board 06/01/2021

1. Heard.

2. The petitioner has approached this Court on account of inaction on the part of the respondents in taking final decision with regard to petitioner's absorption under the policy to adjust/absorb surplus employee of Madhya Pradesh State Road Transport Corporation (in short "MPSRTC"), initially placed at the disposal of the Chhattisgarh Infrastructure Development Corporation.

3. Petitioner is presently working under the respondent No.4 upon being sent on deputation by CIDC. Averments made in the petition would show that the petitioner is surplus employee of MPSRTC.

4. This Court in number of cases including the case of A.K. Dwivedi v. State of Chhattisgarh & Others [W.P.(S) No.4245/2010, decided on 06.08.2010] considered similar claims and issued directions. Thereafter, replying upon the orders passed in the case of A.K. Dwivedi (supra), directions have been issued in the case of O.P. Singh v. State of Chhattisgarh & Others [WP(S) No.5521 of 2010, decided on 21.01.2011].

5. In view of above, it is directed that in the event petitioner submits his representation before the competent authority within a period of three weeks from today, the respondent authority shall consider and decide the petitioner's representation in an objective manner keeping in view the circular issued by the State Government from time to time as also orders of absorption passed with respect to similarly placed employees, as early as possible, preferably within a period of three months from the date of submission of representation.

6. With the aforesaid observation, the petition is finally disposed of. Sd/- (P. Sam Koshy) Judge Rohit