Petitioner sought recovery of illegally deducted salary. Respondent produced an attendance register showing petitioner absent. Court held such factual disputes require separate adjudication via appropriate legal recourse rather than writ jurisdiction.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
Page 1 of 2
NAFR
HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR
WPS No. 1794 of 2021
Abhishek Singh, S/o Shri Vimal Kumar Singh, Aged About 30 Years, Ex-Tuberculosis Health Visitor, R/o Ram Ashrey Bhawan, Arvind Nagar, Bandhwapara, Sarkanda, Bilaspur, Police Station Sarkanda, Tahsil & District- Bilaspur (C.G.)
---- Petitioner
Versus
For State : Mr. Ravi Bhagat, Dy. Govt. Advocate.
Hon'ble Shri Justice Narendra Kumar Vyas Order on Board
10.08.2022
Page 2 of 2
which, the petitioner was shown to be remain absent for the month from April, 2020 to October, 2020. The petitioner is also present in person before this Court and objected the authenticity and correctness of the attendance register produced by the CMHO. This disputed facts cannot be adjudicated by this Court while hearing the petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India.
Sd/(Narendra Kumar Vyas) Judge
Arun
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the authenticity of the attendance register shown to the petitioner can be adjudicated by this Court during writ proceedings.
What recourse is available to the petitioner to rebut the authenticity of the attendance register.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Abhishek Singh
State of Chhattisgarh
Narendra Kumar Vyas
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
