Yogeshwar Singh Kashyap v. State Of Chhattisgarh

NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR WPS No. 7953 of 2018 Yogeshwar Singh Kashyap S/o Late Shri Alakhram Aged About 50 Years Head Master At Primary School Tumakala, Samkul Samanwayak Bori, Block Dhamdha, District Durg Chhattisgarh., District : Durg, Chhattisgarh ---- Petitioner

Versus

1. State Of Chhattisgarh Through Secretary, Department Of School Education, Mahanadi Bhawan, Mantralaya New Raipur, District Raipur Chhattisgarh., District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh

2. District Education Officer And District Pariyojana (Samanwayak) Rajiv Gandhi Shiksha Mission Sarva Shiksha Abhiyan, Durg, District Durg Chhattisgarh., District : Durg, Chhattisgarh

3. Block Recourse Person Block Strot Kendra Samanwayak, Rajiv Gandhi Shiksha Mission Sarva Shiksha Abhiyan, Durg, District Durg Chhattisgarh., District : Durg, Chhattisgarh

4. Chandrakant Sahu Sahayak Shiksha Panchayat Govt. Primary School Kareli, Block Dhamdha, District Durg Chhattisgarh., District : Durg, Chhattisgarh ---- Respondents For petitioner :

Shri Ajay Shrivastava, Advocate.

For State :

Shri Dhiraj Wankhede, GA Hon'ble Shri Justice P. Sam Koshy Order on Board 04/12/2018 1.

The petitioner is substantively a senior Head Master, Primary School in the Primary School by virtue of which the petitioner has been given an additional charge of Cluster Coordinator (Samkul Samanwayak). The petitioner has worked as Cluster Coordinator for the last more than 7 years. Abruptly the charge of the Cluster Coordinator ordered to be handed over to the Assistant Teacher that is respondent No. 4 who is much junior in post as well as in seniority is concerned. No reason, whatsoever, as to why the charge from the petitioner is being taken. Neither there seem to be any order by which the petitioner has been posted anywhere else. By such a situation, the petitioner who is senior now would have to work under respondent No. 4 who happens to be much junior to the petitioner.

2.

Given the the said facts and the circumstances, this Court is of the opinion that no fruitful purpose would be served in keeping the writ petition pending rather ends of justice would meet if the writ petition stands disposed off with direction to the respondent No. 2 & 3 to resolve the dispute and pass an appropriate order within a period of 45 days from today. It is expected that the respondents No. 2 & 3 while passing order would take into consideration the relevant rules and regulations and would also keep in mind the seniority of the petitioner while deciding his claim.

3.

Accordingly, the writ petition stands disposed off. Sd/- (P. Sam Koshy) Rohit JUDGE