Laxmikant Sharma v. the State of Chhattisgarh

Chhattisgarh HC24 Sept 2024MCC/823/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Laxmikant Sharma; MCC No. 823 of 2024; High Court of Chhattisgarh, Bilaspur; 2024:CGHC:37818; decided 25/09/2024 by Justice Deepak Kumar Tiwari; modification/correction of order dated 07.12.2023 in WPS No.9348/2023 (A.S. Kalele and 5 others v. State of C.G. and 3 others); date of retirement wrongly recorded as 30.06.2002, rectified to 30.06.2000; superannuation order dated 30.06.2000, Annexure A/2; Durga Post Graduate College Raipur; advocates Ms. Neelam Jaswani and Mr. M.L. Sahu for applicant, Mr. Shailesh Puriya for respondents.

What did the court decide?

Modification of the order dated 07.12.2023 passed in WPS No.9348/2023 effected: the 'Date of Retirement' at serial No.6 of para No.1 is henceforth to be read as 30.06.2000 (instead of the erroneously recorded 30.06.2002), with the remaining part of that order left intact. ¶¶24

Laxmikant Sharma Vs the State of Chhattisgarh — Chhattisgarh HC (2024) — LawSathi Research

1 / 2

2024:CGHC:37818

NAFR

HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR

¶5

MCC No. 823 of 2024

¶6

Laxmikant Sharma S/o Late Shri Vasudeo Sharma Aged About 84 Years Retired Professor, R/o Shri Dev Panchang Kalyan, Nayapara, Raipur, District Raipur (C.G.)

¶7

...Applicant

¶8

versus

¶9

1. The State of Chhattisgarh Through The Secretary, Department Of Higher Education, Mahanadi Bhavan, Mantralaya, Atal Nagar, Nawa Raipur (C.G.)

¶10

2. The Commissioner Higher Education, Government Of Chhattisgarh, Mahanadi Bhawan, Mantralaya, Atal Nagar, Nawa Raipur (C.G.)

¶11

3. Durga Education Society, Raipur Through The President Durga Post Graduate College, Raipur, (C.G.)

¶12

4. The Principal Durga Post Graduate College, Raipur, (C.G.)

¶13

...Respondents

¶14

For Applicant : Ms. Neelam Jaswani, Advocate appears on behalf of Mr. M.L. Sahu, Advocate For Respondent : Mr. Shailesh Puriya, PL

¶15

Hon'ble Shri Justice Deepak Kumar Tiwari

Order On Board

2 / 2

25/09/2024

1. Default pointed out by the Registry is ignored.

¶20

2. Heard.

¶21

3. This petition has been filed for modification of the order dated 07.12.2023 passed in WPS No.9348/2023 (A.S. Kalele and 5 others v. State of C.G. and 3 others) wherein at serial No.6 of para No.1, under the heading ‘Date of Retirement’, the retirement of the petitioner was incorrectly mentioned as ‘30.06.2002’ instead of ‘30.06.2000’.

¶22

4. Learned counsel for the applicant referred to the superannuation order dated 30.06.2000 issued by respondent No.4 vide Annexure A/2, which shows that the applicant was superannuated on 30.06.2000, but in the impugned order, it has been wrongly mentioned as 30.06.2002.

¶23

5. After perusal of the document referred to, the said fact is found to be correct. Accordingly, the error that crept in the order dated 07.12.2023 is hereby rectified and the date that has been mentioned therein at serial No.6 of para No.1, under the heading ‘Date of Retirement’ be henceforth read as ‘30.06.2000’.

¶24

6. With the aforesaid modification, this MCC stands disposed of and the remaining part of the order shall remain intact.

¶25

Sd/-

¶26

(Deepak Kumar Tiwari) Judge

¶27

Priyanka

Laxmikant Sharma v. the State of Chhattisgarh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Laxmikant Sharma v. the State of Chhattisgarh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Rananjay Singh Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Chhabi Agrawal Vs Sandeep Agrawal

Ajay Mahajan Vs Smt. Aruna Dighraskar

Masat Ram (Since Dead) through Lrs- (a) Mus. Sukhmani Bai Vs Parasnath Gupta

Smt. Biram Bai Vs Smt. Kalindari Bai Sahu

Laxminarayan Vs Indira Bai