Disposed

Deeplal Janghela v. State of Chhattisgarh and Ors.

Chhattisgarh HC1 Jul 2014WPS/5584/2007

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Single bench order in three writ petitions regarding cancellation of employee promotions. Court allowed respondents to file representations for similar treatment based on a subsequent analogous decision, with interim relief continued.

What did the court decide?

Petitioners allowed to file representations seeking similar treatment within one month; interim relief continued; pleas disposed of.

Deeplal Janghela Vs State of Chhattisgarh and Ors. — Service and Employment | Chhattisgarh HC (2014)

¶1

BILASPUR WRIT PETITION’s Noisg _

¶2

' Deeplal Janghela S/o Late Kumwar Smgh Janghela ~ > Aged about 48 years , Occupation—Semce Pentry lncharge (C M House lvn Lines) Ralpur,.Dlstt Ralpur ‘-’ (Chhattlsgarh ) State f7 Chhattlsgarh through the Secretary,i Ji :»i‘ Department of Tourism Mantralaya Dau Kalyan ’_;1‘S ” mghBhawan‘ Ralpur Distt e e Ralpur \ ‘ (Chhattlsgarh ) C hhattlsgarh B oard Paryata V I ndira Gand hi Ralpur V (Chha, garh) [through the Managing 'Dwector, Ralpur District > Raipur (Chh’at‘tis’ga‘rh) ? >WRI'T PETITION UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA FOR ISSUANCE OF WRIT I N - THE NATURE OF CERTIORARI MANDAMU,_S ' P ROHIBITION AND OTHER SUITABLE WRIT OR WRI TS ' V , ‘F DIR.CTION OR DIRECTIONS ORDER OR ORDERS W

¶3

[.93

¶4

HIGH COURT^{OFCHHATTISGARH} : BILASPUR' W.P.(S)^{No.5571of2007}

¶5

PETITIONER Dilip Acharya Versus

¶6

RFSPONDENTS State of^{Chhattisgarh&another}

¶7

W.P.(S)^{No.5584of2007}

¶8

" \

¶9

PETITIONER Deeplal Janghela Versus

¶10

State of^{Chhattisgarh&another}

¶11

RFSPONDENTS

¶12

And

¶13

W.P.(S) No.5593^of2007

PETITIONER

T.R. Janghela

Versus

RFSPONDENTS State of Chhattisgarh^&another

¶19

Single Bench : Hon'ble Shri^{JusticePrashantKumarMishra}

¶20

Present^:- Shri Ashish^{Shrivastava,coUnseIforthepetitioners.} Shri Y.S.^{Thakur,Deputy AdvocateGeneralfortheState.} Shri A.S.^{Kachhawaha,counselforrespondentNo.2.}

¶21

()RAL ORDER

¶22

-"_/1

¶23

(Passed^{onthis‘1stdayofJuly,2014)}

¶24

Heard learned^{counselfortheparties.}

¶25

.1. The petitioner^namely; Dilip Acharya {W.P. (S)^{No.5571of2007}} was promoted^fromthe post^{ofreceptionisttoManagervideorder} dated 26-09-2006,^{however,hispromotionhasbeencancelledby} the impugned^{orderdated05—07-2007.}

¶26

The petitioner namely; Deeplal Janghela {W.P. (S) No.5584 of 2007} was promoted^from the^{postofStewardtoreceptionistvide} orderd ated 26-09—2006, however, his promotion has been cancelled^{bytheimpugnedorderdated05-07-2007.}

¶27

[c2%

¶28

43.^{Thepetitionernamely;TR.Janghela{W.P.(S)No.5593of2007}} was promoted^fromthe post^{ofAssistantGrade—i} to the post of_ Project Assistant (Yojna^{Sahayak)on26—09-2006.} however, this order was^{cancelledbytheimpugnedorderdated05-07-2007.}

¶29

Learned counsel for the petitioners has filed copy of the order

¶30

_4. dated 23-06—2011, passed^{bytherespondentManaging} Director, Chhattisgarh Tourism Board, directing that the earlier order of in respect of Shri^{VijayParmar,whose} promotion^was

¶31

promotion also cancelled^{on05-07—2007,ismaintained.Meaningtherebythat} the order cancelling^his promotion^{hasbeensetatknot.}

¶32

‘ln view of the subsequent development, learned counsel for the petitioners would submit that each of the petitioners deserve similar treatment^{andtheirrepresentationsshouldbeconsidered} by the Chhattisgarh Tourism Board or by any other competent authority, in accordance^withlaw.

¶33

. Learned counsel for respondent No.2 would submit that if any representation is filed by the petitioners,^{thesameshallbedealt} _with^{inaccordancewithlaw.}

¶34

ln view of the^above, it is directed^{thatsincerepresentationOfthe} similarly placed employee has already been considered by respondent No.2, the petitioners are allowed to prefer representations^{againsttheimpugnedordertobesubmittedwithin} a period of one month^fromtodayand on such representations being filed,^{thesameshallbedealtwithbythecompetent} authority

¶35

in accordance^withIawand shall pass^{areasonedorderonthe} representations^Withina period^{ofthreemonthsthereafter.}

¶36

Since the petitioners are enjoying interim relief from 20b7, it is directed that^during pendency^{oftheirrepresentations,theinterim} relief passed earlier^bythisCourt shall^{remaininoperation.}

¶37

. It is made clear, if the occasion^soarises,the petitioners^wouldbe at liberty to move^{afreshbeforethisCourt.}

¶38

‘10. Accordingly, all^thewrit petitions^{standdisposedof.} No order as to c^osts.

¶39

Sd//-

¶40

Prashant Kumar Mishra
Judge

Deeplal Janghela v. State of Chhattisgarh and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Deeplal Janghela 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

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

The Fertilizer Corp. of India Ltd. Vs Urvarak Karamchari Sangh and Anr.

C.G. Class Three Govt. Emp.Ass.Jashpur Vs State of Chhattisgarh and Others

Nemichand Guni Vs State of Chhattisgarh and Ors.

Amrit Lal Bariha and Anr. Vs State of Chhattisgarh and Ors.

Dilip Acharya Vs State of Chhattisgarh and Ors.

T.R. Janghela Vs State of Chhattisgarh and Ors.