Sunil Kumar Kaushik v. State Of Chhattisgarh

NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR WRIT PETITION (S) NO.6415 OF 2019 Sunil Kumar Kaushik S/o Shri Prem Lal Kaushik Aged About 45 Years Presently Working As Assistant Grade - III In Nagar Panchayat Sargaon District - Mungeli Chhattisgarh.

...Petitioner(s)

Versus

1. State of Chhattisgarh Through The Secretary, Department of Urban Administration and Development, Mahanadi Bhavan, Atal Nagar, Naya Raipur, District Raipur Chhattisgarh.

2. Nagar Panchayat Sargaon Through Chief Municipal Officer, Nagar Panchayat Sargaon, District - Mungeli Chhattisgarh.

3. The Joint Director, Regional Office, Department Of Urban Administration And Development, Bilaspur, District Bilaspur Chhattisgarh.

4. Nagar Panchayat, Sargaon, Through Chief Municipal Officer, Nagar Panchayat Sargaon, District - Mungeli Chhattisgarh. ... Respondent(s) For Petitioner :

Shri Sudeep Agrawal, Advocate.

For Respondent-State :

Shri Ayaz Naved, Govt. Advocate.

Hon'ble Shri Justice P. Sam Koshy Order on Board 26.08.2019

1. The limited grievance that the petitioner has raised is that, though the petitioner has all the requisite eligibility criteria for promotion to the post of Accountant, the respondent No.2 has not taken any decision in this regard till date inspite of petitioner having recommendation from the President in Council (PIC) of the Nagar Panchayat, Sargaon, District Mungeli.

2. The facts of the case is that, the petitioner substantively is an Assistant Grade-III and has completed more than five years of service and has also undergone Accounts Training which makes him eligible for promotion to the post of Accountant. The petitioner is a senior most person in the department under the respondent No.3. The said post of Accountant is to

be filled up by way of promotion as per the rules and the case of the petitioner has been forwarded on recommendation by the President in Council to the respondent No.2, but till date no decision has been taken.

3. Given the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case, this court is of the opinion that no fruitful purpose would be served in keeping this petition pending rather ends of justice would meet if the respondent No.2 is directed to take an appropriate decision on the claim of the petitioner for promotion at the earliest preferably within a period of four months from the date of receipt of copy of this order.

4. It is made clear that this court has not expressed any opinion so far as entitlement of the petitioner is concerned. The same shall be considered by the respondent No.2 in accordance with rules governing the field.

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