Disposed

Amarjeet Ram v. the State of Chhattisgarh

Chhattisgarh HC24 Jan 2024WPS/434/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The petitioner, promoted to Headmaster and already joined the post, challenged an order directing him to appear in counseling for fresh posting. Relying on a prior judgment, the Court held that teachers who have already joined the promoted post are not liable for fresh counseling and disposed of the petition accordingly.

What did the court decide?

Directions for counseling for fresh posting held not applicable to the petitioner as he had already joined the promoted post.

Amarjeet Ram Vs the State of Chhattisgarh — Service and Employment | Chhattisgarh HC (2024)

¶1

¶2

NAFR

¶3

HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR Writ Petition (S) No. 434 of 2024

¶4

Amarjeet Ram S/o Shri Dev Lal Ram aged about 38 Years at presently posted and working as Headmaster, Government Primary School, Boys Hostel, Chandranagar, Block - Ramchandrapur, District- Balrampur-Ramanujganj, Chhattisgarh.

¶5

---- Petitioner

¶6

Versus

¶7

The State of Chhattisgarh Through The Secretary, Department of School Education, Mahanadi Bhawan, Atal Nagar, Nawa Raipur, District - Raipur, Chhattisgarh.

¶8

The Director, Public Education, Indrawati Bhawan, Atal Nagar, Nawa Raipur, District - Raipur, Chhattisgarh.

¶9

The Collector, District - Balrampur-Ramanujganj, Chhattisgarh.

¶10

The Distirct Education Officer, Balrampur, District - BalrampurRamanujganj, Chhattisgarh.

¶11

The Block Education Officer - Ramchandrapur, District - BalrampurRamanujganj, Chhattisgarh.

¶12

---- Respondents

¶13

(Cause title, as taken from CIS System)

¶14

___________________________________________________________ For Petitioner : Mr. Rahul Mishra, Advocate For State/Respondents : Mr. Syashdhar Diwan, Deputy Government Advocate

¶15

Hon'ble Shri Justice Arvind Singh Chandel

Order on Board

25.01.2024

Heard.

This writ petition has been preferred by petitioner being aggrieved of impugned order dated 27.04.2023 (Annexure P/1) passed by

¶20

¶21

Respondent No.4 i.e. District Education Officer, Balrampur, DistrictBalrampur- Ramanujganj (C.G.) whereby, respondent authority without canceling the posting order of the petitioner dated 14.10.2022 and directed him to appear in counseling for fresh place of posting.

¶22

It is submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that earlier the petitioner has filed the petition challenging the order dated 20.10.2022 passed by the Collector Balrampur, Ramanujganj, whereby Collector Balrampur, Ramanujganj has cancelled the promotion order and directed to do promotion through counseling. The High Court stayed the order passed by the Collector as he has no authority to cancel the promotion order issued by the competent authority, thereafter, the Collector clarified the factual matrix vide its memo dated 25.10.2022 that promotion order has not been cancelled, the posting of promoted Headmaters has only been cancelled. Subsequently, vide order dated 17.02.2023 the Collector has cancelled the order constituting the Committee for counseling of promoted Headmasters for their posting and on same date 17.02.2023 itself, the DEO constituted five-members Counseling Committee for postings of promoted Headmaster which was also clarified by the State Government that the Committee constituted by the DEO on 17.02.2023 is only for considering the posting of Headmasters who have promoted vide order dated 14.10.2022.

¶23

Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner herein further submits that the matter has been squarely covered with the judgment passed by this Court in WPS No.5166 of 2023 (Smt. Subhagini Lakda Vs. State of Chhattisgarh and Ors.) wherein this Court has clarified the fact that the teachers who have already been promoted and joined in their promoted place of posting their original institution shall be considered as promoted place, therefore, it is prayed by the counsel that in the light of Subhagini Lakda (supra) this petition may be disposed of.

¶24

Learned counsel appearing for the respondent-State admitted the fact that in Subhagini Lakda (supra) this Court has observed in paragraph 5 which reads as under:-

¶25

“It is clarified that the direction issued by the Block Education Officer on 27.06.2023 will not be applicable to the case of the petitioner as he has already promoted and joined. It is also made clear that the assistant teachers who have already promoted and joined in their promoted post, their original institution shall be considered as promoted place and rest of the assistant teachers who have not joined the place after promotion, their principal institution will be treated the institution where they

¶26

¶27

are working as Assistant Teacher.”

¶28

As it is prayed by learned counsel appearing for the respondentState that the matter of the petitioner herein also identical to the case of Subhagini Lakda (supra), this petition may also be disposed of in the similar terms and observations as mentioned in Subhagini Lakda (supra). On examination of the facts in this petition, it is quite clear that the petitioner herein have also joined his promoted place of posting as Headmaster, therefore, in the light of Subhagini Lakda (supra) it is directed that the directions issued by the concerned DEO/BEO dated 27.04.2023, 27.06.2023 and 30.06.2023 will not be applicable to the case of petitioner herein as he has already been promoted and joined in his promoted place of posting. The respondent authorities is directed to verify the fact before taking any final decision.

¶29

With the aforesaid observation, the present writ petition is disposed of.

¶30

CC as per rules.

¶31

Sd/- (Arvind Singh Chandel) Judge

¶32

Amit Patel

Amarjeet Ram v. the State of Chhattisgarh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Amarjeet Ram v. the State of Chhattisgarh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Ravikant Minj Vs State of Chhattisgarh

J.R. Nishad Vs State of C.G.

Deendayal Yadav Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Smt. Sushma Asha Manila Khalko Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Chandresh Sharma Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Asir Ahmad Vs the State of Chhattisgarh