Vishnu Singh Thakur v. State Of Chhattisgarh
NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR Writ Appeal No. 809 of 2018 {Arising out of order dated 26.10.2018 passed by learned Single Judge in Writ Petition (S) No. 7072 of 2018} • Vishnu Singh Thakur, Son of late Shri Amar Singh Thakur, aged about 61 years, posted as Assistant Superintendent (Land Record), Collectorate Office, Raipur, District Raipur (C.G.) (wrongly written as Superintendent in the writ petition) ---- Appellant
Versus
1. State of Chhattisgarh, Through : The Secretary, Revenue and Disaster Management Department, Mantralaya, Mahanadi Bhawan, Atal Nagar, Raipur, District Raipur (C.G.)
2. Under Secretary, State of Chhattisgarh, Revenue and Disaster Management Deparment, Mantralaya, Mahanadi Bhawan, Atal Nagar, Raipur, District Raipur (C.G.)
3. Deputy Secretary, State of Chhattisgarh, Revenue and Disaster Management Department, Mantralaya, Mahanadi Bhawan, Atal Nagar, Raipur, District Raipur (C.G.)
4. Director, Land Record, Chhattisgarh Bhawan, Mantralaya, Mahanadi Bhawan, Atal Nagar, Raipur, District Raipur (C.G.)
5. Collector, Raipur, District Raipur (C.G.) ---- Respondents For Appellant :
Shri Raghvendra Pradhan, Advocate.
For Respondents/State :
Shri S.C. Verma, Additional Advocate General. Hon'ble Shri Ajay Kumar Tripathi, Chief Justice Hon'ble Shri Justice Parth Prateem Sahu Judgment on Board Per Ajay Kumar Tripathi, Chief Justice 02.01.2019 1.
Heard counsel for the Appellant and learned Additional Advocate General for the State.
2.
Keeping in mind that in an identical situation the representations of two other employees working in the Department of Revenue and Disaster Management, Government of Chhattisgarh have been allowed to continue since their superannuation is within less than two years, whereas the claim of the present Appellant has been rejected on the same date, even though he is identically placed, the appeal is allowed.
3.
The order of rejection dated 06.10.2018 passed by the Competent Authority which has been upheld by the learned Single Judge are interfered with. The impugned order dated 26.10.2018 passed by the learned Single Judge as well as order dated 30.11.2018 are set aside alongwith the order dated 06.10.2018. 4.
Respondent authorities are directed to take a fresh decision. Sd/- Sd/- (Ajay Kumar Tripathi) (Parth Prateem Sahu) Chief Justice Judge Brijmohan