Dismissed
Awadesh Kumar v. State of Chhattisgarh and Ors.
Chhattisgarh HCWPS/4219/2010
Case brief
from the order text
What is this about?
HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH JUDICATURB…
What the court decided
AI extract
HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH JUDICATURB…
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
G?
^.) .
IN THE HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH JUDICATURB ATBILASPUR
W.JP. / s / JVO. ^V^ /20JO
r'
PKTmONBR
PKTmONBR Mjuade^tKitmar yOMS.Mcindcd 7^^ Agedcbout53yecffs, -"^L^-^ ^••^:'^ ^^Ocscupcction-Sub-E^gawer ^G^"'" Q^ ^^1^^^^ Etednocrf/MechGinaxri Public HeatQz EnguTeeritTg Dqjcaiment Sub Division , Kawardhs.Distn.ct - KEttAxmSTafChhattisgafh)
VWKSUS
RBSPONDElrrS : (1) StetteofChhc( isgEah, ^ D^xjrtmemqfPublicHeam EnginQenng^Msntfakiya,
D.K.S. BhaujanRccpur(C.a)
.^' (2) EngineermOvef, D^xirtmentofPublicHeatlh Bngineeiing ,Rayjur (C.G.)
(3) S.W. Manuihjr AssistcintEngoTeer Department ofPublic Heatfh Engtneenng,JanjgirOTanyja (C.G.)
(4) A.k. Tiwctri ^
^
^) •^
AssisteffrtEngineer Offio^ofEh^neerm Chxef D^jartment ofPublic Heatlh EngoiBering, Rcupur (C.G.)
WRIT PETITI0N W/DER ARTICLB 226 OFTW^CO^WWnON QF INDJA
.i_._
-^ ^\
H1GH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR
S.B: HQn5bleShnPrash^r^^
Writ Petition (St No. 4219/2010
PETITIONER : Awadesh Kumar
Versus
RESPONDENTS : State of Chhattisgarh and others
Appearance:
Miss. Deepaii Pandey, counsei for the petitioner. Shri Y.S. Thakur, Dy.A.G. for the State. Shri Sushobhit Singh, counsei for respondent No.3.
WRST PETITION UNDERARTICLE 226 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDSA ORAL ORDER (9.02.2012)
The only reiief claimed in the writ petition is for a direction to the respondent to decide petitioner's representation regardlng consideration of petitioner's case for promotion to the post of Assistant Engineer.
(2) By an interim order dated 2/01/2012 which was subsequentiy clarified on 23/01/2012 it was directed that representation fijed by the petitioner shail be considered by the competent authority and be intimated to thls court on 9/02/2012. (3) Learned State Counsel submits that the representation has been decided by an order dated 8/02/2012. He has placed before this court a copy ofthe said order. (4) Copy of the said order is placed in the record of this writ petltion. (5) !n view of the above, and looking to the reiief claimed in the writ petition, this writ petition has been rendered infructuous, however the petitioner wouid be at liberty to file appropriate proceedings induding a fresh writ petition to challenge the order by which representation has been dismissed.
(6) With the above observation, this writ petition is dismissed as mfructuous.
Sd/prashantKumarMishra Judge
r
1 issue framed by the court
Whethertothepetitionersrepresentationforpromotiontotheappropriateposttherepdhilds.beldurgwdagxachd
Awadesh Kumar
State of Chhattisgarh
D.K.S. Bhaujan Repur
S.W. Manjur
A.K. Tivari
Assistant Engineer Office of Chief Engineer
Prashant Kumar Mishra
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court