Disposed

Smt. Chandrakanta Devi Verma v. State Of Chhattisgarh and Ors.

Chhattisgarh HC10 Jul 2014WPS/3138/2014

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Single bench order in a writ petition wherein the High Court disposed of the petition by directing the competent authority to scrutinize the petitioner's representation within one month and pass necessary orders within two months based on verification of her identical placement.

What did the court decide?

Direction to competent authority to scrutinize petitioner's representation within one month and pass orders within two months if identically placed.

Smt. Chandrakanta Devi Verma Vs State… — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Chhattisgarh HC (2014)

¶1

IN THE HON’BLE HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR ‘3\‘7>%

W. P. (S) No.

PETITIONER

/2014 f3.w’v

Smt.Chandra.kanta Devi Verma, W/o Shri Suresh Kumar Verma, ASI (M), Aged about 38 years, Posted in the office of DSP, Range Police, MT Workshop, Raipur, District Raipur. (C.G)

V E R S U S

RESPONDENTS 1 .

State of Chhattisgarh, Through: The Secretary, Finance Department, Mahanadi Bhawan, Mantralaya, New Raipur, District Rajpur (C.G.) Secretary, Department of Home Department, Mahanadi Bhawan, Mantralaya, New Raipur, District Raipur (C.G.) Director General of Police, Police Headquarters, Civil Lines, Raipur, District Raipur (C.G.) Deputy Superintendent of Police, Range Police, MT Workshop, Raipur, District Raipur. (C.G) The Director, Directorate of (Treasury, Accounts 8L Pension), Raipur (C.G.). Joint Director, (Treasury,^Accounts 85 Pension) Raipur Division, Raipur (C.G.)

¶10

WRIT PETITION UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA FOR ISSUANCE OF A WRIT IN THE NATURE OF MANDAMUS, PROHIBITION, CERTIORARI ETC. OR ANY OTHER DIRECTION OR ORDER TO DO JUSTICE IN THE MATTER

§ Fa?

HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH : BILASPUR W.P. (S) No.3138 of 2014

¶15

PETITIONER Smt. Chandrakanta Devi^Verma

¶16

Versus

¶17

RESPONDENTS State of Chhattisgarh & others

¶18

Single Bench: Hon'ble Shri^{JusticeManindraMohanShrivastava}

¶19

Present :- Shri Adil Minhaz, counsel for the petitioner. Shri Shashank Thakur, G.A.^fortheState.

¶20

ORAL ORDER

¶21

(Passed^on10/7/2014)

¶22

Heard learned counsel^forthe parties.

¶23

. Learned counsel for the petitioner^{wouldsubmitthatthe} petitioner^is working as Assistant Sub-lnspector (M). Her grievance is that despite order passed^bythisCourt in W.P. No.4653/2006 and the order passed by Division Bench^{on03-05-2012inW.A.No.426/2011} against which the Supreme Court has dismissed S.L.P. (Civil) No.13274l2013 vide order dated 29-07-2013, the benefits made admissible to the^similarly placed persons^{videorderAnnexureP-t} issued by Home Department has not been extended to the petitioner.^{Hewouldsubmitthat‘theDirectorGeneralofPolicehas} already issued communication^{on28.09.2013forextending} similar benefits to all the similarly placed persons,^but yet^{necessaryorders} have not been passed.

¶24

, Learned State counsel would submit that in the event petitioner submits fresh representation before the competent authority, her case shall be Scrutinized^and if after due verification^{ifitisfoundthat} her case is similar, she shall^{beentitledtoallsuchbenefitsavailable} to her in accordance^withlaw.

¶25

¶26

. In view of the above, petition is disposed of with a direction that in the event petitioner submits fresh representation before the competent authority claiming similar treatment as has been extended to the previous set of petitioners in whose^{favourAnnexure} P-1 has been passed, within a period of one month from today,^the competent authority shaii scrutinize her case and if on verihcation it is found that the petitioner is identicaiiy placed,^{necessaryordersin} this regard be passed in accordance with^{iawwithinafurther} period of two months.

¶27

. If any adverse order is passed^againstthe petitioner,^shewouldbe

¶28

at iiberty to move a fresh before^thisCourt.

¶29

¶30

Sdl— han^{Shr'w as‘a‘m}

Smt. Chandrakanta Devi Verma v. State Of Chhattisgarh and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Smt. Chandrakanta Devi Verma v. State Of Chhattisgarh and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

M/s v.m. Coal and Transport Vs State Of Chhattisgarh

M/s Coal Trade Zone Vs State Of Chhattisgarh and Ors.

Kanker Roadways Vs State Transport App.Tri.and Ors.

Kailash Rajput Vs Regional Trasport Authority Raipur and Ors.

M/s Ambachem Industries Vs State Of Chhattisgarh and Anr.

Smt.amita Kaudo Vs State Of Chhattisgarh And Anr.