High Court Of ChhattisgarhWPS/7998/2018dismissed

Narsingh v. The State Of Chhattisgarh

2018-12-05Hon'Ble Shri Justice P. Sam Koshy2 pages

-1NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPS No. 7998 of 2018 Narsingh S/o Asman Aged About 27 Years Working As Assistant Professor (Guest Faculty) Economics, Government College, Bakawand, District Bastar Chhattisgarh, R/o Village And Post Kijoli, Tahsil Bakawand, District Bastar Chhattisgarh.

---- Petitioner

Versus

1. The State Of Chhattisgarh Through Secretary, Department Of Higher Education, Mahanadi Bhawan, Mantralaya, New Raipur Chhattisgarh.

2. Union Of India Through The Director, University Grant Commission, Bahadur Shah Jaffar Marg New Delhi 110002.

3. The Commissioner Higher Education, Block C-3, 2nd And 3rd Floor, Indravati Bhawan, Raipur, Naya Raipur District Raipur Chhattisgarh

4. The Principal Government College, Bakawand, District Bastar Chhattisgarh.

---Respondents For Petitioner :

Ms. Laxmin Kashyap, Advocate For respective Respondent :

Mr. N.K. Vyas, Advocate Hon'ble Shri Justice P. Sam Koshy Order on Board 05/12/2018

1. The challenge in the present writ petition is to the advertisement dated 25.07.2018.

2. In pre-lunch session, this Court had directed the State counsel to seek instructions. On instructions the State counsel submits that the advertisement has since been acted upon and the selected candidates have been appointed against the advertised posts, for which the petitioner had also participated and selected elsewhere and they have also joined the services on 31.08.2018 and 05.09.2018 respectively. Ms. Neelima Nirmalkar is one of the selected candidates, who has been appointed where the petitioner was working.

-23. Given the said facts, nothing further remains to be adjudicated upon, so far as the substantial grievance of the petitioner is concerned. So far as the monetary claim, if any, the petitioner would be at liberty to file a fresh petition for the same.

4. Given the said facts that the advertisement has been acted upon and the selected candidates had been appointed, this Court is of the opinion that the present Writ Petition in its present form would not be sustainable and the same deserve to be and is accordingly dismissed.

5. Reserving the right of the petitioner to approach the authorities concerned for redressal of his other grievance so far as his monetary claims, if any, are concerned.

6. With the aforesaid observation, the Writ Petition accordingly stands dismissed.

Sd/- (P. Sam Koshy) Judge Ved