Digvijay Singh Markam v. State Of Chhattisgarh
NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR WPS No. 311 of 2020
1. Digvijay Singh Markam S/o Shri Baldev Singh Markam, Aged About 29 Years R/o H. No. 70/l, Naveen Colony, Farasgaon, District Kondagaon Chhattisgarh
2. Dileep Singh, S/o Shri Amer Singh, Aged About 28 Years R/o Village And Post Chhatauna, Tehsil Kota, Bilaspur, District Bilaspur (Chhattisgarh) ---- Petitioners
Versus
1. State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Secretary, Department Of Agriculture And Bio-Technology, Mantralaya, Mahanadi Bhawan, Naya Raipur, Raipur Chhattisgarh
2. Director, Department Of Horticulture, And Field Forestry, Indrawati Bhawan, Atal Nagar, Raipur Chhattisgarh ---- Respondents For Petitioners :
Ms. Ruchi Nagar, Advocate For Respondents/ State :
Shri Amrito Das, Addl A.G.
Hon'ble Shri Justice Goutam Bhaduri Order On Board 15/01/2020
1. The prayer of the petitioners is that the petitioners applied for the post of Rural Horticulture Extension Officer. The selection list was published of 306 candidates, out of which 123 candidates did not joined and the petitioners were placed at waiting list. Subsequently, in the vacant post the candidate joined in intervals and lastly the appointment was made on 23.08.2019 (Annexure P-6) and the expiry date is given on 31.03.2020. In view of the waiting list candidates it is contended that till today 2 posts are vacant and petitioners are aspirants and are ready to join and as has been done with other posts for joining the petitioner may also be allowed to join the 2 posts
on ground of parity. Further reference is made to Annexure P-5 and submit that the petitioner has made a representation and that may be decided by the concern authority so that the remaining 2 posts for which the petitioner are eligible they may be appointed.
2. Considering the same, the averments and after perusal of document if the petitioners are entitled and if they have already been shortlisted as waiting list candidates, the petitioners are given liberty to file a fresh representation apart from Annexure P-5 to Respondent No. 2 within a period of 2 weeks from today which shall be decided by Respondent No. 2 within a further period of 60 days from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. The petitioner shall be at liberty to raise all the grounds and pleading in such representation. It is expected that the petitioners shall be treated equally as that of other waiting list candidates who were given appointments in intervals.
3. It is made clear that this Court has not expressed any opinion on merits of the case.
4. Accordingly, the writ petition stands allowed and disposed off. Sd/- Goutam Bhaduri Judge Jyoti