Disposed

Kundan Singh Thakur v. State Of Chhattisgarh

Chhattisgarh HC10 Nov 2024WPS/2033/2016

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioner appointed on urgent basis as Assistant Grade-03 in 2007 was discharged after his service ceased to be extended. Court disposed of the writ petition directing respondents to consider him for the post if further requirements arise, strictly in accordance with law.

What did the court decide?

Respondent Nos.2-4 directed to consider petitioner's case for Assistant Grade-03 posts at Swawalamban Centre, Raipur if requirements arise, in accordance with law.

Kundan Singh Thakur Vs State Of Chhattisgarh — Service and Employment | Chhattisgarh HC (2024)

1 / 3

NAFR

CHANDRAKANT DEWANGAN

HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR

¶5

Digitally signed by CHANDRAKANT DEWANGAN Date: 2024.11.11 18:29:25 +0530

¶6

WPS No. 2033 of 2016

¶7

Kundan Singh Thakur S/o Shri Hari Singh Thakur, Aged About 42 Years, R/o Giri Chowk, Badhaipara, P.S. Azad Nagar, District Raipur (C.G.).

¶8

... Petitioner

¶9

versus

¶10

State Of Chhattisgarh Through Secretary, Panchayat And Social Welfare Department, Mahanadi Bhawan, New Mantralay, District Raipur (C.G.).

¶11

The Director, Panchayat Social Welfare Department, Indrawati Bhawan, New Mantralay, District Raipur (C.G.).

¶12

The Joint Director, Panchayat Social Welfare Department, Indrawati Bhawan, New Mantralay, District Raipur (C.G.).

¶13

The Superintendent, Bind And Deaf School, Muth Puraina, District Raipur (C.G.).

¶14

Mr. Ashok Tiwari, In-Charge Superintendent Of Swawlamban And InCharge Of Blind And Deaf School, Muth Puraina, District Raipur (C.G.).

¶15

... Respondents

¶16

For Petitioner : Mr. Manas Vajpai, Advocate appears on behalf of Mr. Sandeep Dubey, Advocate. For Respondents/State : Mr. Ruhul Ameen, Panel Lawyer.

¶17

2 / 3

¶18

Hon'ble Shri Justice Sanjay S. Agrawal

¶19

Order on Board

¶20

11/11/2024

¶21

Heard.

¶22

The case of the petitioner is that he was appointed to the post of Assistant Grade-03 on 27.02.2007 for a period of one year on urgent basis, which he continued for a very long time and ultimately, vide order impugned dated 04.03.2016 (Annexure P-1), his service was not extended and, in absence of extension order, he was discharged from his duty, leading to filing of this writ petition. This Court vide interim order dated 05.07.2016, directed the concerned respondents that if they have further require of many posts of Assistant Grade–03 at Swawalamban Centre in Raipur, they shall consider the case of the petitioner on preferential basis. In compliance of the order dated 05.07.2016, the petitioner was granted extension on 28.08.2017 for a period of one year, however, no further extension was granted after completion of the said period.

¶23

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the respondents/ competent authorities may be directed to consider the case of the petitioner, in case of requirements for the post of Assistant Grade-03 in accordance with law.

¶24

Learned State counsel would submit that since there was no work, therefore, the services of the petitioner could not be extended.

¶25

3 / 3

¶26

Be that as it may, respondent Nos.2, 3 & 4/competent authorities are directed to consider the case of the petitioner if they have further requirements for the posts of Assistant Grade-03 at Swawalamban Centre in Raipur, on its own merit strictly in accordance with law and looking to the administrative exigency, if any.

¶27

With the aforesaid observations and directions and without expressing any opinion on the merits of this case, this writ petition stands disposed of finally.

¶28

-Sd/-

¶29

(Sanjay S. Agrawal) Judge

¶30

Chandrakant

Kundan Singh Thakur v. State Of Chhattisgarh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Kundan Singh Thakur 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

Ramvishal Vs Chief Managing Director

Anil Khandelwal Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Moolchand Kocher (Jain) Vs the Registrar Public Trust

Sam Sai Paikara Vs State Of Chhattisgarh

M/S Jai Ambey Emergency Services(I) Private Limited Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Mahendra Sponge and Power Ltd. Vs South Eastern Coalfields Ltd.