Disposed

Umesh Kumar Singh v. State of Chhattisgarh

Chhattisgarh HC22 Feb 2023WPS/104/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioners challenged an order cancelling their promotion as Head Master. The High Court observed that the impugned order had already been withdrawn by the authorities through clarificatory and subsequent orders. Finding the grievance redressed, the Court disposed of the petition without deciding the merits.

What did the court decide?

The writ petition is disposed of as the grievance is redressed by the appeal court and authorities have withdrawn the impugned order.

Umesh Kumar Singh Vs State of Chhattisgarh — Service and Employment | Chhattisgarh HC (2023)

¶1

¶2

NAFR

¶3

HIGH COURT of CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR

¶4

WPS No. 104 of 2023

¶5

Umesh Kumar Singh S/o Ram Sundar Singh, Aged About 52 Years Working As Head Master (Primary School) Under T-Cadre, At Government Primary School, Pindara, Block Balrampur, District Balrampur - Ramanujganj Chhattisgarh

¶6

Smt. Premlata Patwa W/o Indradev Prasad, Aged About 36 Years Working As Head Master (Primary School) Under T-Cadre, At Government Primary School, Nawadihkhurd, Block Balrampur, District Balrampur - Ramanujganj Chhattisgarh

¶7

---- Petitioners

¶8

Versus

¶9

State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Secretary, Department Of School Education, Mantralaya, Mahanadi Bhawan, Atal Nagar Naya Raipur, District Raipur Chhattisgarh

¶10

Director, Directorate Of Public Instruction, Indrawati Bhawan, Atal Nagar Naya Raipur, District Raipur Chhattisgarh

¶11

Joint Director, Education Division Surguja (Ambikapur), District Surguja Chhattisgarh

¶12

Collector, District Balrampur - Ramanujnanj Chhattisgarh

¶13

District Education Officer, Balrampur - Ramanujganj, District Balrampur - Ramanujganj Chhattisgarh

¶14

Block Education Officer, Balrampur, District Balrampur - Ramanujganj Chhattisgarh

¶15

---- Respondents

¶16

(cause title is taken from Case Information System)

¶17

For Petitioner : Mr. Govind Prasad Dewangan, Advocate For Respondent-State : Mr. Sandeep Dubey, Dy. Advocate General

¶18

Single Bench: Hon'ble Shri Parth Prateem Sahu, Judge

¶19

ORDER

¶20

22/02/2023

¶21

Challenge in this writ petition is to the order dated 20.10.2022 passed by respondent-Collector cancelling promotion of petitioners on the post of Head Master (Primary School) and directed to grant promotion through counselling mode.

¶22

2 Learned counsel for petitioners submits that while working as Assistant Teacher (L.B.) petitioners are promoted to the post of Head Master

¶23

¶24

(Primary School) vide order dated 14.10.2022. Mentioning discrepancy in promotion order of Assistant Teachers to the post of Head Master, respondent- Collector vide order dated 20.10.2022 cancelled promotion order and directed to grant promotion through counselling. Several identical writ petitions are filed challenging cancellation of promotion order and this Court considering the fact that respondent Collector has no authority to cancel promotion order issued by Competent Authority i.e. District Education Officer, granted stay in favour of petitioners therein. Impugned order has been passed without issuing any notice to petitioner or affording opportunity of hearing to him.

¶25

3 Learned Dy. Advocate General for the State would submit that immediately after issuance of order dated 20.10.2022, respondentCollector issued clarificatory letter dated 25.10.2022 to the effect that order dated 20.10.2022 is not a cancellation order of promotion but posting of promoted Head Masters has only been stayed. Subsequently, vide order dated 17.2.2023 respondent Collector has cancelled the order constituting Committee for counseling of promoted Head Masters for their posting. On the same date i.e. 17.2.2023, respondent District Education Officer constituted five-members Counseling Committee to consider matters relating to posting of promoted Head Masters in terms of letter/instructions dated 7.2.2022 of the Director, Public Instructions, Raipur. He placed before this Court copies of orders dated 25.10.2022 & 17.2.2023 passed by the Collector.

¶26

Learned Dy. Advocate General also submits that due to typographical mistake, in the order of the District Education Officer dated 17.2.2023 constituting Committee for counseling of promoted Head Masters for their posting, it has been wrongly mentioned that proceeding of promotion is to be initiated. The Committee constituted by the respondent District Education Officer on 17.2.2023 is only for considering posting of Head Masters who are promoted vide order dated 14.10.2022.

¶27

¶28

4 Heard learned counsel for parties and perused documents placed before this Court.

¶29

5 Challenge in this writ petition is primarily to the order dated 20.10.2022 passed by the respondent Collector cancelling promotion order of 1180 Assistant Teachers (LB) to the post of Head Master (Primary School). Learned Additional Advocate General for the State has placed before this Court copy of order dated 25.10.2022, which was also considered by this Court while granting interim relief to other similarly situated petitioners on 4.11.2022 in batch of writ petitions, one of which is being WPS No.7358/2022. The Collector has clarified In order dated 25.10.2022 that order dated 20.10.2022 is with respect to stay on posting of newly promoted Head Masters and not on their promotion. A copy of order dated 17.2.2023 passed by the Collector is also placed before this Court by which order dated 27.10.2022 constituting Committee for counseling is cancelled. The order passed by the respondent Collector affecting order of promotion of Assistant Teachers (LB) has already been cancelled. Copy of another order dated 17.2.2023 issued by the respondent District Education Officer constituting Committee for counselling of promoted Head Masters for their posting, is also placed before this Court.

¶30

6 From the facts discussed above and perusal of reliefs sought in this writ petition i.e. quashment of order dated 20.10.2022, which has already been cancelled, it is apparent that grievance raised by petitioner in this petition is redressed by issuance of orders dated 17.02.2023 by the Collector and the District Education Officer, and now nothing remains to be decided in this writ petition.

¶31

7 Accordingly, writ petition stands disposed of.

¶32

Certified copy as per rules.

¶33

Sd/-

¶34

(Parth Prateem Sahu) Judge

¶35

/P a w a n

Umesh Kumar Singh v. State of Chhattisgarh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Umesh Kumar Singh 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

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Ashok Kumar Bhagat Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Rakesh Das Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Shraddha J Agrwal Vs Shri Arun Vora

Smt. Sangeeta Patel Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Baldev Singh Ayam Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Mangal Sai Toppo Vs State of Chhattisgarh