I. P. Sarthi v. State Of Chhattisgarh

-1NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR Writ Petition (S) No. 4907 of 2020

1. I. P. Sarthi S/o Shri Patang Ram Aged About 49 Years Posted As Sub Engineer, Nagar Palik Nigam, Raigarh, District Raigarh Chhattisgarh. ---Petitioner(s)

Versus

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

2. The Director Urban Administration And Development Department, Indravati Bhawan, Nawa Raipur District Raipur Chhattisgarh.

3. The Commissioner Municipal Corporation, Raigarh District Raigarh Chhattisgarh.

4. Ashutosh Pandey Posted as Commissioner, Municipal Corporation, Raigarh District Raigarh Chhattisgarh.

---Respondents For Petitioner :

Shri Raghvendra Pradhan, Advocate.

For State :

Shri Sudeep Verma, Dy. Govt. Advocate.

For Respondents 3&4 :

Shri Pankaj Agrawal, Advocate.

Hon'ble Shri Justice P. Sam Koshy Order on Board 10.12.2020

1. Challenge in the present writ petition was the order of suspension dated 09.11.2020. The said order of suspension was issued only on the ground that the petitioner has unnecessarily demanded for certain documents in respect of show cause notice that was issued to the petitioner on an earlier occasion.

2. This court on the previous date of hearing i.e. on 01.12.2020 had stayed the effect and operation of the impugned order of suspension dated 09.11.2020.

3. Today, the counsel for the Municipal Corporation submits that he has instructions to state that the respondent-corporation shall be revoking the order of suspension and the Corporation shall also be providing the petitioner with all relevant documents that he has sought for and thereafter

-2shall proceed further in accordance with law so far as show cause notice that was issued to the petitioner is concerned.

4. Given the said submissions by the counsel for the respondent-corporation, this court is of the opinion that there would be no further necessity of keeping the writ petition pending. Accordingly, the writ petition stands disposed of directing the respondent-corporation to take steps for revoking the order of suspension and to provide the petitioner with all relevant documents sought for, which is in their possession, and only thereafter take appropriate steps on the show cause notice proceedings in accordance with law.

5. The writ petition accordingly stands disposed of. Sd/- (P. Sam Koshy) Judge inder