Disposed

Kumari Rajani Pinjani v. State of Chhattisgarh through Secretary

Chhattisgarh HC8 Sept 2021WPS/3645/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a service guarantee case, the High Court of Chhattisgarh ordered the State to decide on the petitioner's pending representation regarding promotional avenues and designation changes within 60 days, noting recommendations made by the Corporation.

What did the court decide?

The writ petition was disposed of directing the respondent State to take a decision on the petitioner's representation within 60 days.

Kumari Rajani Pinjani Vs State of… — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Chhattisgarh HC (2021)

¶1

-1-

¶2

NAFR

¶3

HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR

¶4

WPS No. 3645 of 2021

¶5

1. Kumari Rajani Pinjani D/o Late Shri Chandrapal Pinjani Aged About 50 Years Occupation Assistant General Manager Finance And Administration C.M.D.C / Chhattisgarh Mineral Development Corporation Limited Raipur Residence Shankar Nagar Raipur District Raipur Chhattisgarh., District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh

¶6

---- Petitioner

¶7

Versus

¶8

1. State Of Chhattisgarh Through Secretary Mineral Resources Department , Government Of Chhattisgarh Mantralaya Mahanadi Bhawan Naya Raipur , District Raipur Chhattisgarh.

¶9

2. Manager Director C.M.D.C. Limited / Chhattisgarh Mineral Development Corporation Limited Atal Nagar, Naya Raipur , District Raipur Chhattisgarh., District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh

¶10

---Respondents

¶11

For Petitioner	:	Shri Prateek Sharma, Advocate.
For State	:	Shri Ayaz Naved, G.A.
For Resp. No. 2	:	Shri Yogendra Pandey on behalf of
		Shri Animesh Tiwari,Advocates.

¶12

Hon'ble Shri Justice P. Sam Koshy Order on Board

¶13

08.09.2021

¶14

1. Counsel for the petitioner at the outset submits that the grievance of the petitioner as of now would be redressed if the writ petition is disposed of directing the respondent No. 1 to take a decision on the representation which is pending consideration before the respondent No. 1 since long.

¶15

-2-

¶16

2. The grievance of the petitioner is that the non availability of promotional avenues to the petitioner in the light of the new set up which has been introduced in the respondent No. 2-Corporation, thereby the petitioner would lose her further promotional avenues for all time to come.

¶17

3. Counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is also aggrieved by the change in the nomenclature of the designation which the petitioner was earlier holding and what is now prescribed under new the set up.

¶18

4. Counsel for the petitioner further contended that the respondent No. 2-Corporation, where the petitioner is discharging her duties, have already made a couple of recommendations in-favour of the petitioner seeking approval/modification in the set up to the respondent no. 1/ State, where the recommendations are still pending consideration and therefore an appropriate decision be taken at the earliest.

¶19

5. The further grievance of the counsel for the petitioner is that the respondents have further initiated steps for filling up of the promotional post in accordance with the new set which can cause a long term detriment to the interest of the petitioner and thus prays for an early decision by the respondent No.1 on her representation.

¶20

6. Considering the limited grievance that the petitioner has and the limited relief that the petitioner seeks, the present writ petition at this juncture is disposed of directing the respondent No. 1 to take a decision on the representation of the petitioner at the earliest in

¶21

-3-

¶22

accordance with the law preferably within a period of 60 days from the date of the receipt of copy of this order. The respondent while taking a decision, shall also take note of the recommendation made by the respondent No. 2 in this regard.

¶23

7. Accordingly, the present writ petition stands disposed of.

¶24

Sd/(P. Sam Koshy) Judge

¶25

J-

Kumari Rajani Pinjani v. State of Chhattisgarh through Secretary

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Kumari Rajani Pinjani v. State of Chhattisgarh through Secretary

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

Beduram Yadav Vs State Of Chhattisgarh

Smt. Rajan Bai Vs State Of Chhattisgarh

Santosh Kumar Kainan Vs State Of Chhattisgarh

State Of Chhattisgarh And Ors. Vs Fekin Bai And Anr.

State Of Chhattisgarh And Ors. Vs Shriram And Anr.

Ku. Tripti Daya Vs the State of Chhattisgarh