Disposed

Sudhir Singh Thakur v. State of Chhattisgarh

Chhattisgarh HC2 Jan 2019WPS/8399/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court disposed of a writ petition concerning the withdrawal of increment due to non-qualification. The Court directed the respondents to examine the petitioner's claim following the procedure laid down in a prior order.

What did the court decide?

Direction to the Respondents to examine the Petitioner's claim in terms of the order dated 03.11.2017 in Jayant Kumar Patle v. State of Chhattisgarh.

Sudhir Singh Thakur Vs State of… — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Chhattisgarh HC (2019)

¶1

¶2

NAFR

¶3

HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR

¶4

WPS No. 8399 of 2018

¶5

Sudhir Singh Thakur S/o Kalyan Singh Thakur, Aged About 37 Years, Working As Teacher (Panchayat) At Govt. Middle School Paraswani, Block Simga, District Baloda Bazar Bhatapara, Chhattisgarh.

¶6

---Petitioner

¶7

Versus

¶8

State Of Chhattisgarh, Through The Secretary, Department Of Panchayat And Rural Development, Mahanadi Bhawan, Mantralaya, Naya Raipur, District Raipur Chhattisgarh.

¶9

Chief Executive Officer, Zila Panchayat, Baloda Bazar Bhatapara, District Baloda Bazar Bhatapara Chhattisgarh.

¶10

---Respondents

¶11

For petitioner : Shri Govind Dewangan, Advocate. For State : Ms. Sunita Jain, Panel Lawyer.

¶12

Hon ' ble Shri Justice P. Sam Koshy

¶13

Order on Board

¶14

02/01/2019

¶15

The Petitioner is aggrieved by the action of the Respondents, whereby

¶16

the increment granted to the Petitioner is being withdrawn on the ground that

¶17

he has not passed B.Ed/D. Ed examination.

¶18

Learned Counsel for the Petitioner submits that the issue with regard to

¶19

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

¶20

issued for affording proper opportunity of hearing and then decide the matter.

¶21

¶22

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).

¶23

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

¶24

(supra) and take appropriate decision thereon.

¶25

The writ petition stands accordingly disposed of.

¶26

Sd/-

¶27

(P. Sam Koshy)

¶28

JUDGE

¶29

Sumit

Sudhir Singh Thakur v. State of Chhattisgarh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sudhir Singh Thakur 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

Smt. Usha Choubey Vs State Of Chhattisgarh

Mrs. Hempushpa Ratre Vs State Of Chhattisgarh

Ghanshyam Puri Vs State Of Chhattisgarh

Dhansai Sidar Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Balkaran Vs Chhattisgarh State Ware Housing Corporation

Sarvottam Kesar Vs State of Chhattisgarh