Disposed

Rupesh Kumar Dewangan v. State Of Chhattisgarh

Chhattisgarh HC10 Apr 2017WPS/1663/2017

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Chhattisgarh directed the Nagar Panchayat, Bilaigarh, to complete the recruitment process for the post of Lecturer within three months, reiterating the Collector's order to reassess candidates if still operative, while disavowing any opinion on the merits of the case before referring authorities to decide according to law.

What did the court decide?

The Nagar Panchayat Bilaigarh directed to complete the recruitment process within three months of service of the certified copy of the order, subject to the Collector's order remaining operative.

Rupesh Kumar Dewangan Vs State Of Chhattisgarh — Education and Admissions | Chhattisgarh HC (2017)

¶1

¶2

NAFR

¶3

HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR

¶4

WPS No. 1663 of 2017

¶5

Rupesh Kumar Dewangan S/o Shri Koduram Dewangan, Aged About 26 Years R/o Station Para Belsoda, Police Station Mahasamund, District Mahasamund (Chhattisgarh).

¶6

---- Petitioner

¶7

Versus

¶8

State of Chhattisgarh Through Secretary, Department Of Panchayat, Mahanadi Bhawan, Mantralaya New Raipur, District Raipur (Chhattisgarh).

¶9

Director, Urban Administration, R. D. A. Building Shastri Chowk Raipur, District Raipur (Chhattisgarh).

¶10

Joint Director, Urban Administration, R. D. A. Building Shastri Chowk Raipur, District Raipur (Chhattisgarh).

¶11

Chief Executive Officer, Nagar Panchayat Bilaigarh, District Baloda BazarBhatapara (Chhattisgarh).

¶12

---- Respondent

¶13

For Petitioner : Shri Ajay Shrivastava, Advocate For Respondents-State : Shri Shashank Thakur, GA for the State

¶14

Hon'ble Shri Justice Prashant Kumar Mishra

¶15

Order On Board

¶16

10/04/2017

¶17

In the recruitment conducted by Nagar Panchayat, Bilaigarh for filling up the post of Lecturer (Nagariya Nikay), the petitioner's candidature was rejected, which led to filing of appeal by the petitioner before the Collector, Baloda Bazar-Bhatapara, which was allowed on 29.01.2016 directing the Nagar Panchayat to reassess/re-evaluate candidature of all the candidates who had applied for the post and thereafter prepare fresh merit list and appoint the eligible, meritorious candidate within two months.

¶18

¶19

It is argued that despite lapse of more than a year, the Nagar Panchayat has not proceeded further in the matter.

¶20

Considering the entire facts situation of the case, the Nagar Panchayat, Bilaigarh is directed to take action to complete the recruitment process in accordance with the direction issued by the Collector, Baloda BazarBhatapara on 29.01.2016, if the said order of Collector is still operative. Let the Nagar Panchayat complete the process within a period of three months from the date of service of certified copy of this order.

¶21

It is made clear that this Court has not expressed any opinion on the merits of the case and the respondent authorities shall decide the matter, on its own merits, strictly in accordance with law, without treating any observation made in this order, as opinion on the merits of the case

¶22

Accordingly, the writ petition stands disposed of.

¶23

Sd/-

¶24

Judge

¶25

Prashant Kumar Mishra

¶26

Ashu

Rupesh Kumar Dewangan v. State Of Chhattisgarh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Rupesh Kumar Dewangan v. State Of Chhattisgarh

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

Smt Poornima Pushpakar Vs State Of Chhattisgarh

Vinod Kumar Sinha Vs State Of Chhattisgarh

Afsana Praveen Vs State Of Chhattisgarh

Tulsi Yadav Vs Secl and Anr.

Kuleshwar Joshi Vs State Of Chhattisgarh

Devveer Singh Vs State Of Chhattisgarh