Disposed

Mr. Sudarshan Singh Ahir v. the State of Chhattisgarh

Chhattisgarh HC8 Jan 2019WPS/26/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Chhattisgarh disposed of a writ petition concerning the withdrawal of increment due to lack of B.Ed/D.Ed. The Court directed the Respondents to examine the Petitioner's claim in accordance with a prior order in Jayant Kumar Patle.

What did the court decide?

Direction to Respondents to examine Petitioner's claim regarding increment withdrawal in terms of order dated 03.11.2017 in Jayant Kumar Patle case.

Mr. Sudarshan Singh Ahir Vs the State… — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Chhattisgarh HC (2019)

¶1

NAFR

¶2

HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR

¶3

WPS No. 26 of 2019

¶4

Mr. Sudarshan Singh Ahir S/o Mr. Baijnath Ahir Aged About 46 Years By Occupation Lecturer Panchayat, Govt. H.S.S. Basanwahi, Block Narharpur, District Uttar Bastar Kanker Chhattisgarh., District : Kanker, Chhattisgarh

¶5

---- Petitioner

¶6

Versus

¶7

The State Of Chhattisgarh Through Its Secretary, Panchayat And Rural Department, Mantralaya, Naya Raipur, District Raipur Chhattisgarh., District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh

¶8

Commissioner Cum Director Panchayat, Sanchanalaya, Naya Raipur, District Raipur Chhattisgarh., District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh

¶9

Chief Executive Officer Zila Panchayat, District U.B. Kanker Chhattisgarh., District : Kanker, Chhattisgarh

¶10

---- Respondents

¶11

For Petitioner : Mr. Parag Kotecha Advocate For State : Mr. Jitendra Pali, Dy. AG

¶12

Hon'ble Shri Justice P. Sam Koshy

¶13

Order on Board

¶14

08/01/2019

¶15

The Petitioner is aggrieved by the action of the Respondents, whereby the increment granted to the Petitioner is being withdrawn on the ground that he has not passed B.Ed/D. Ed examination.

¶16

Learned Counsel for the Petitioner submits 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 v. 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.

¶17

Learned Counsel for the State submits 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).

¶18

Considering the aforesaid submission, this petition is finally disposed of, 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.

¶19

The writ petition stands accordingly disposed of.

¶20

Sd/-

¶21

(P. Sam Koshy)

¶22

Rohit Judge

Mr. Sudarshan Singh Ahir v. the State of Chhattisgarh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mr. Sudarshan Singh Ahir v. the 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

Hemant Kumar Soni Vs Divisional Commissioner

Kumari Bai Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Kanchan Singh Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Deepak Jaiswal Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Yudhishthir Pareshwar Vs the State of Chhattisgarh

Mrs. Ranjana Gupta Vs the State of Chhattisgarh