Disposed

Dr. Ram Kumar Khunte v. State of Chhattisgarh

Chhattisgarh HC14 Feb 2019WPS/980/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In this writ petition, the petitioner, a government teacher sidelined due to pending disciplinary proceedings, sought a direction to the Disciplinary Authority to decide on the pending enquiry report. The court directed the authority to decide within 45 days.

What did the court decide?

The Disciplinary Authority directed to take an appropriate decision on the enquiry report within 45 days.

Dr. Ram Kumar Khunte Vs State of… — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Chhattisgarh HC (2019)

¶1

¶2

NAFR

¶3

HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR

¶4

WPS No. 980 of 2019

¶5

Dr. Ram Kumar Khunte S/o Shree Chinta Ram Khunte, Aged About 43 Years, Assistant Teacher (Lb), Posted At Government Primary School, Pachari, Block - Pamgarh, District - Janjgir Champa Chhattisgarh, R/o Village Pachari, Post Pakariya, Tahsil / Thana - Pamgarh, District - Janjgir - Champa Chhattisgarh.

¶6

---Petitioner

¶7

Versus

¶8

State Of Chhattisgarh, Through The Secretary, School Education Department, Mantralaya, Mahanadi Bhawan, Naya Raipur, Raipur Chhattisgarh.

¶9

District Education Officer, Janjgir - Champa Chhattisgarh.

¶10

¶11

1. Chief Executive Officer, Zila Panchayat District - Janjgir Champa, Chhattisgarh.

¶12

The Chief Executive Officer, Janpad Panchayat, Pamgarh, District - Janjgir - Champa Chhattisgarh.

¶13

---Respondents

¶14

For petitioner : Shri Mateen Siddiqui, Advocate. For State : Shri Rahul Mishra, Dy.G.A.

¶15

Hon ' ble Shri Justice P. Sam Koshy

¶16

Order on Board

¶17

14/02/2019

¶18

The limited relief which the petitioner has sought through the instant

¶19

Writ Petitions is for a direction to the respondents to take an appropriate decision on the disciplinary proceedings that were initiated against the petitioner.

¶20

According to the counsel for the petitioner, the petitioner was placed

¶21

under suspension in the year 2006 and the suspension was subsequently revoked and taken back in service in the year 2015. Meanwhile, the Enquiry

¶22

¶23

Officer concluded the enquiry and had submitted the enquiry report also to the Disciplinary Authority. However, the Disciplinary Authority till date has

¶24

not taken any decision.

¶25

The grievance of the petitioner is that, because of the pendency of disciplinary proceedings, the juniors to the petitioner have got promoted and – –

¶26

the petitioner is still languishing as Siksha Karmi Grade III.

¶27

Given the facts and circumstances of the case, let the Disciplinary Authority in so far as the petitioner is concerned take an appropriate decision on the enquiry report that has been furnished by the Enquiry Officer at the earliest preferably within a period of 45 days from the date of receipt of copy of this order.

¶28

It shall be the responsibility of the petitioner to apprise the respondents so far as the order passed by this Court is concerned.

¶29

Sd/-

¶30

(P. Sam Koshy)

¶31

JUDGE

¶32

Sumit

Dr. Ram Kumar Khunte v. State of Chhattisgarh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Dr. Ram Kumar Khunte 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

Sandeep Kumar Shoree Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Radha Raman Gupta Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Mansingh Vs Balkaran Yadav

Dena Bank Vs Manohar Indal Maladhare

Rakesh Kumar Gupta Vs State Of Chhattisgarh

Jagdish Singh Vs Yaswant Kumar