Disposed

Dr. Basubandhu Diwan v. State of Chhattisgarh

Chhattisgarh HC4 Nov 2020WPS/2661/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court directed the State to restore the petitioners, who were previously promoted and demoted, to their original positions with seniority and order the disposal of their pending representations within three months.

What did the court decide?

Directed the State to restore petitioners to original posts/seniority within 3 months and discharge petitioners via disposal.

Dr. Basubandhu Diwan Vs State of… — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Chhattisgarh HC (2020)

¶1

¶2

HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR

¶3

WPS No. 2661 of 2020

¶4

Dr. Basubandhu Diwan S/o Shri J.D. Diwan Aged About 55 Years Head Master, Govt. Pre Middle School DIET, District Bemetara Chhattisgarh.

¶5

Bhav Singh Janardan S/o Shri Ghunuram Janardan Aged About 50 Years Head Master, Govt. Middle School, Bahera, District Bemetara Chhattisgarh.

¶6

Kripa Narayan Singh S/o Shri Sanphool Singh Aged About 57 Years Head Master, Govt. Pre Middle School, Andu, District Bemetara Chhattisgarh.

¶7

Krishna Kumar Tiwari S/o Shri G.P. Tiwari Aged About 59 Years Head Master, Govt. Pre Middle School, Lolesara, District Bemetara Chhattisgarh.

¶8

Ghanshyam Bihari Namdeo, S/o Shri B.D. Namdeo Aged About 55 Years Head Master Govt. Pre Middle School Rajkudi, District Bemetara Chhattisgarh.

¶9

Lalit Kumar Patel S/o Shri Jham Singh Patel Aged About 53 Years Head Master, Govt. Pre Middle School, Kandai, District Bemetara Chhattisgarh

¶10

---- Petitioners

¶11

Versus

¶12

State Of Chhattisgarh Through Secretary, School Education Department, Mahanadi Bhavan, Atal Nagar, Raipur, District Raipur Chhattisgarh

¶13

Director Public Education, Department Indravati Bhavan, Atal Nagar, Raipur, District Raipur Chhattisgarh.

¶14

District Education Officer Bemetara, District Bemetara Chhattisgarh.

¶15

---- Respondents

¶16

For Petitioner	: Shri Anup Majumdar, Advocate
For State	: Shri Amrito Das, Addl A.G.

¶17

Hon'ble Shri Justice Goutam Bhaduri

Order

04.11.2020

Heard.

The issue raised in the petition has already been settled in the different rounds of litigation.

¶22

It is contended that the petitioners were promoted in the year 2010, which was subject of challenge on the basis of the rules on which the promotion

¶23

¶24

was made. Initially, the High Court set aside the rules and thereby the promotion were annulled. Against the order of the High Court the aggrieved party preferred a petition before the Hon'ble Supreme Court and the Hon'ble Supreme Court remanded back the matter for re-hearing. Subsequently again petitions were filed before the High Court bearing WPS Nos. 4012 of 2010, 4581 of 2010 and 4891 of 2010 wherein order was passed on 01.08.2017 (Annexure P-7).

¶25

The relevant part of the judgment dated 01.08.2017 reads as under:-

¶26

The persons who have sought intervention following the order of remit passed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court had pointed out that they had succeeded and were promoted following the limited departmental examination, but have however been demoted as a result of judgment passed by this Court on 05.04.2011 which has since been set aside by the Hon'ble Supreme Court through the order of remit made on 16.09.2014. Since we do not find any reason to interfere with the impugned 2008 Rules or the advertisements and the limited departmental examinations conducted, and also because these writ petitions are bad for non-joinder of necessary parties inspite of due opportunity, the action taken under the impugned Rules and the impugned selection have necessarily to be given effect to. This means that those persons who have been reverted or promoted as a consequence of the judgment rendered by this Court on 05.04.2011, which has since been annulled by the Apex Court through the order of remand dated 16.09.2014, have to be restored to respective positions that they held before 05.04.2011. Obviously, the 2014 Rules would then operate on such fact situation.

¶27

Thereafter, pursuant to the order passed by the High Court on 01.08.2017, State authority passed an order on 12.03.2018 (Annexure P-8) whereby it was observed as under:-

¶28

ekuuh; mPp U;k;ky; fcykliqj }kjk ;kfpdk dzekad 4012@2010 esa ifjr vkns'k fnukad 01-08-2017 ,oa dk;kZy; egkvf/koDrk eku-mPp- U;k;ky; fcykliqj ds fof/kd lykg fnukad 03-10-2017 vuqlkj 05-04-2011 ds iwoZ dh fLFkfr esa dk;Zjr iz/kku ikBd iwoZ ek/;fed 'kkyk ds in ij iwoZ esa inksUur f'k{kd@lgk-

¶29

¶30

f'k{kd@iz/kku ikBd] iwoZ ek/;fed 'kkyk ftUgksusa inksUur in ij dk;ZHkkj xzg.k fd;k Fkk] mUgsa inksUur in ij inksUufr frfFk ls ofj"Brk dh ik=rk gksxhA

¶31

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that despite the order has been passed by the State the same has not been carried out in its true spirit and the present promotion are carried out and again it would lead to litigation. Therefore, he prays that representation of the petitioner (Annexure P-9) may be decided.

¶32

Perused the documents.

¶33

From the perusal of the order of this Court which was subsequently passed on 01.08.2017, it appears that pursuant to the observation made in Para 12, State authority has already passed the order on 12.03.2018 (Annexure P-8) which purports that the persons who were promoted and had taken the charge they should be restored back to their original place along with the seniority. In view of this State is directed to comply its own order accordingly after verification of facts of each of the petitioners. The said exercise shall be carried out within a period of 3 months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.

¶34

With the aforesaid observation, the petition stands disposed of.

¶35

Sd/-

¶36

Goutam Bhaduri Judge

¶37

Jyoti

Dr. Basubandhu Diwan v. State of Chhattisgarh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Dr. Basubandhu Diwan 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

Amit Kumar Singh Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Udyan Dubey Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Roshan Kumar Bhagat Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Balram Vs Shri v. K. Bhatpahari

Sheikh Waize Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Ram Singh Sahu Vs State of Chhattisgarh