Ramu Lanjhekar v. State Of Chhattisgarh

NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR WRIT PETITION (S) NO.6904 OF 2018 Ramu Lanjhekar S/o Late Shri Sunderlal Lanjhekar, Aged About 35 Years R/o Village and Post Rabeli, Tahsil Kawardha, District Kabirdham Chhattisgarh.

...Petitioner(s)

Versus

1. State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Secretary, Agriculture Department, Mantarlay, Mahanadi Bhawan, Naya Raipur, District Raipur Chhattisgarh.

2. Director Agriculture, Directorate Agriculture Chhattisgarh Raipur, District Raipur Chhattisgarh.

3. Joint Director, Agriculture Raipur, District Raipur Chhattisgarh.

4. Deputy Director Agriculture, District Kabirdham Chhattisgarh.

5. Sub Divisional Agriculture Officer, Kawardha District Kabirdham Chhattisgarh.

... Respondent(s) For Petitioner :

Shri Awadh Tripathi, Advocate.

For Respondent-State :

Shri Anshuman Shrivastava, Panel Lawyer.

Hon'ble Shri Justice P. Sam Koshy Order on Board 18.03.2019

1. The challenge in this petitioner is the order of termination dated 17.09.2018 (Annexure P/1). The termination was on the ground that the petitioner has suppressed the material facts in respect of his criminal antecedent prior to his coming into employment and the said fact was not disclosed in the Form which was filled up by the petitioner at the time of recruitment.

2. At this juncture, the counsel for the petitioner makes a limited prayer that the authorities may reconsider the termination order of the petitioner in the light of the judgment of Supreme Court in case of Avtar Singh Vs. Union of India & Ors., 2016(8) SCC 471.

3. The counsel appearing for the State do not have any objection to that extent.

4. Accordingly, let the respondent No.2 consider the case of the petitioner in accordance with principles laid down by the Supreme Court in case of

Avtar Singh (Supra) at the earliest preferably within a period of four months from the date of receipt of copy of this order.

5. It is made clear that this court has not expressed any opinion on the merits of the case and the respondents would be free to decide the case of the petitioner purely in accordance with the principles laid down in Avtar Singh's case.

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