Court disposed of a writ petition filed by Neelesh Kumar Kesharwani regarding pension benefits. After noting a three-year pendency, the court directed that the pending appeal challenging the rejection of a stay application be decided expeditiously.
Appeal pending should be decided expeditiously.
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.
/
IH-: Itiil
a"St!
liaLt K"'- ©
WfHE HON'BLEHIGHGOimTOFCHHATnSGARHATBI&ASPUR.
WRrFPETITION (S] No. t^O €{'2009
PETITIONER /-. Neelesh Kumar Kesharwani S/o Shri Jeef Ram Kesharwani, aged about 30 years, resideiit of ViIIage: Madan, Tahsil: Pali, Disf: Korba, Chhaftisgarh. Permanent Resident of Magarpara, Mari Mai, Near ihe Kouse of Prem SOni (Barfan 'WaIa);BiIaspur, Tahsil & DiSfTict: Bllaspur, Clihaftisgarh.
VERSUS
RESPONDENTS ^ 01 Sfate of Clihaffisgarh through theuSecretary: Fanclla.yat Departnient, Mantralaya, Dau Kafyan Singh Bhawan, Raipur, Tahsil & District: Raipur, C. G.
^02. Coniniissioner, Bilaspur Division, Coniinissioner office, MungeH Road, Bilaspur, Tahsil & Disfrict:' Bilaspur, Chfaattisgarh.
^- Chfaattisgarh. • ..••'^..••" /•"'•/ ..^03. ^._ Colfecfor _ „ . .. & :_.. District .. frogram _ Co-ordinafor, gs'31^ ^V ' (©uaranfee ^ under S^n^^^-^t^ NatkmatAcEy S^r^ Ktfrba, 'Er/rt*E^,n RuralDisfriet: T<5c-(-»in+. Kgrba, T^'nt-Ui-t EmploymentC.G. F^ Y^ ^ :%ii? ^4.i <3^f :E&ecu'Sve;^^(Of^^ ^'^^^Keirb^^^inji^^yfsWiW:^^^ ^^^ "y •(Su|aranfiee;:/i<s(;J- |l3istnct:"Koi1|)a, |l3istnct:"Koi1|)a, IC.<S..'
^'^^^Keirb^^^inji^^yfsWiW:^^^ •(Su|aranfiee;:/i<s(;J- |l3istnct:"Koi1|)a, |l3istnct:"Koi1|)a, IC.<S..'
WRTT ffErS5'Km^W226&32T QFI 'EHE CQNSTTFUtlOR QK INSlA.
av ^
•'Se,.^^.^ |XI-HC—78
T5ET '^WW'ti, (?TflyJI<S, Rrtl+iy
^^^./
^st^
^^^^...........U.^J^....M.^^
CT^?T VW (^pf^^^T)
SWS BTft-licb 'ittf^CT^'f •EnH<Tf ^ fe(?t <f?l-^R'
mi S' ffi shW-h ^STfelISf^T
8B : Hou'We JSfiri IUaalnd»aW(oa^iSteiwi)^war3.
6.9.2012
Shri R.K.Singh, ooiinsel ^>r fhc petttioaer.
Shri A.V. SImdhar, Paae Lawyu- dbr the State.
Heard.
Thls petition has been [fifcd by •Qse yetitioaer chaBeagin^ fhe
order passed on 13.10.2009 bj which fhe appBcaticai for grant of stay
ofoxider icapiigned m fhe appc^l was rejectcd.
Taldng iato consideratic|a iticla the nature of petitioa and that fbis
petition has remamed pendmg | siace last abuost 3 years, the petition is
finally disposed off wifh du'ecfloa that flie appeal of the pctittoner, if
stffl pending, shaUbe decjded ^xpeditiousty.
Sd/-
ManindraMobanShrivastava
Prave^.
Judge
a,t. ,.„...-
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the petitioner's appeal challenging the rejection of a stay application should be expedited given the pendency of the writ petition.
Neelesh Kumar Kesharwani
State of Chhattisgarh through their Secretary, Family Welfare Department
Commissioner, Bilaspur Division
Collector and District Program Coordinator
Manindra Mohan Shrivastava
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
