Dismissed

Rohit Kumar Chandrakar v. State of Chhattisgarh

Chhattisgarh HC31 Jan 2018WPS/1033/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In this writ petition, the petitioner challenged the withdrawal of his increment on the ground of not passing B.Ed/D.Ed examination. The court dismissed the petition, directing the respondents to examine the claim in accordance with a previous order.

What did the court decide?

A direction to the respondents to examine the petitioner's claim in terms of the order in Jayant Kumar Patle case.

Rohit Kumar Chandrakar Vs State of… — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Chhattisgarh HC (2018)

¶1

NAFR

¶2

HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR

¶3

WPS No. 1033 of 2018

¶4

Rohit Kumar Chandrakar S/o Late Gaya Prasad Chandrakar, Aged About 40 Years Presently Working As Lecturer Panchayat And Govt. High School, Panwarjali, Block Pandariya, District Kabirdham Chhattisgarh., District : Kawardha (Kabirdham), Chhattisgarh

¶5

---- Petitioner

¶6

Versus

¶7

State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Secretary, Department Of Panchayat And Rural Development, Mantralaya P.S. Rakhi, Tahsil Aarang, Naya Raipur, District Raipur Chhattisgarh., District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh

¶8

Commissioner Cum Director, Directorate Of Panchayat, Naya Raipur, District Raipur Chhattisgarh., District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh

¶9

Chief Executive Officer, Zila Panchayat, Kabirdham, District Kabirdham Chhattisgarh., District : Kawardha (Kabirdham), Chhattisgarh

¶10

---- Respondents

¶11

Shri CJK Rao, counsel for the petitioner/s. Shri Majid Ali, Dy.G.A. for the State.

¶12

Hon'ble Shri Justice Manindra Mohan Shrivastava

Order On Board

31/01/2018

Heard.

The petitioner is aggrieved by the action of the respondents, whereby the increment granted to the petitioner is being withdrawn on the ground that he has not passed B. Ed/D.Ed examination.

¶17

Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the issue with regard to withdrawal/non grant of increment on the ground of having not passed B.Ed/D.Ed examination was examined by this Court in the case of Jayant Kumar Patle vs. State of Chhattisgarh (WPS No.4271 of 2017 and batch of petitions, vide order dated 03.11.2017) and various directions have been issued for affording proper opportunity of hearing and then decide the matter.

¶18

Learned State counsel would submit that the petitioner's claim would be examined after affording opportunity of hearing in terms of order dated 03.11.2017 passed in the case of Jayant Kumar Patle (supra).

¶19

Considering the aforesaid submission, this petition is finally disposed off with a direction to the respondents for examination of petitioner's claim in terms of order passed by this Court in the case of Jayant Kumar Patle (supra) and take appropriate decision thereon.

¶20

Sd/-SD/-

¶21

(Manindra Mohan Shrivastava) Judge

¶22

Deepti

Rohit Kumar Chandrakar v. State of Chhattisgarh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Rohit Kumar Chandrakar 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

Cases cited

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Pt. Ravishankar Shukla University Vs Janki Prasad Sharma

Khudiram Chakrabarty Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Chetan Kumar Chandrakar Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Bajrang Shrivas Vs State Of Chhattisgarh

Narendra Kurrey Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Ku. Kalpana Sahu Vs State of Chhattisgarh