Disposed

Savita Kathale v. State of Chhattisgarh

Chhattisgarh HC21 Apr 2022WPC/1871/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court disposed of a writ petition complaining of inaction on a caste certificate application. The Court directed the petitioner to approach the competent authority with a proper application, noting a 90-day limit for a decision once the application is received. The petition was disposed of pending such action.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner directed to approach competent authority for caste certificate; Authority to decide within 90 days of receipt.

Savita Kathale Vs State of Chhattisgarh — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Chhattisgarh HC (2022)

¶1

¶2

NAFR

¶3

HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR

¶4

W.P.(C) No. 1871 of 2022

¶5

Savita Kathale W/o Shyam Sundar Kathale Aged About 41 Years R/o House No. 1, Talabpara, Village Gailugaon, Gram Panchayt Rajpalpur, Tehsil Lalpur, District Mungeli Chhattisgarh.

¶6

---- Petitioner

¶7

Versus

¶8

State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Secretary, Revenue Department Schedule Caste Welfare Department, Mantralaya, Mahanadi Bhawan, Atal Nagar Nawa Raipur, District- Raipur Chhattisgarh.

¶9

Collector Mungeli, District- Mungeli Chhattisgarh.

¶10

Sub Divisional Officer Revenue Lormi District- Mungeli Chhattisgarh.

¶11

Tehsildar Lalpur District- Mungeli Chhattisgarh.

¶12

---- Respondents

¶13

_____________________________________________________________________ For Petitioner: Shri Arham Siddiqui, Advocate For State/Respondents: Shri Pawan Kesharwani, Panel Lawyer.

¶14

Single Bench:Hon'ble Shri Sanjay S. Agrawal, J Order On Board

¶15

21.04.2022

¶16

Grievance of the Petitioner seems to be the inaction on the part of the Respondents in not receiving and considering the request application of the Petitioner for grant of Caste Certificate.

¶17

Learned Panel Lawyer appearing for the Respondents submits that there does not seem to have any proof available in respect of the Petitioner having approached the Respondents or the Respondents having refused to accept the application. Learned Panel Lawyer further submits that subject to the Petitioner making an appropriate application strictly in accordance with the Act and Rules governing the field, the same shall be considered and decided by the Respondents at the earliest.

¶18

Given the limited grievance that the Petitioner has and the submission

¶19

¶20

that learned Panel Lawyer has made, the present Writ Petition at this juncture is disposed of directing the Petitioner to approach the concerned competent Authority notified for the purpose of issuance of proper Caste Certificate. Upon moving appropriate application by the Petitioner as per the requirement of law, the concerned Authority shall scrutinize and verify the same and take appropriate decision in accordance with the guidelines and procedures prescribed under the law and rules governing the field. In the event of the Petitioner moving such application, the Respondent Authorities are expected to take a decision in this regard within an outer limit of 90 days from the date of receipt of application.

¶21

Writ Petition accordingly stands disposed of.

¶22

Sd/(Sanjay S. Agrawal) JUDGE

¶23

Nikita

Savita Kathale v. State of Chhattisgarh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Savita Kathale 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

Sanjay Kumar Chauhan Vs State Of Chhattisgarh And Ors.

Mahendra Pal Singh Malhotra Vs Managing Director

Munnalal Dewangan Vs State Of Chhattisgarh And Ors.

Itwaar Singh Yadav And Ors. Vs State Of Chhattisgarh And Ors.

Dularam Vidhani Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Lingraj Steel and Power Pvt. Ltd. Vs Assistant Commissioner Sgst