Bihari Ram Nishad Vs State of Chhattisgarh

1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through Its Principal Secretary, Department Of School Education, Mantralaya Mahanadi Bhawan, Atal Nagar Naya Raipur Disrict Raipur Chhattisgarh

¶11

2 - District Education Officer District North Bastar Kanker Chhattisgarh

¶12

3 - Block Education Officer Charama, District North Bastar Kanker Chhattisgarh

¶13

4 - Principal Government Higher Secondary School Awari Block Charama, District North Bastar Kanker Chhattisgarh

¶14

... Respondent(s) For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Faisal Akhtar, Advocate. For Respondent(s)State : Mr. Dashrath Prajapati, Panel Lawyer.

¶15

Hon’ble Mr. Justice Amitendra Kishore Prasad

¶16

Order on Board

¶17

02/12/2025

¶18

By way of this petition, the petitioner has prayed for following

¶19

2

¶20

reliefs:-

¶21

“10.1 That, the Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to direct the respondent authority to place the petitioner in the post of Peon at Government High School Awari, Kanker, Chhattisgarh.

¶22

10.2 That, any other relief(s) which the Hon'ble Court deems fit & proper may kindly be pleased to granted in favour of the petitioner;”

¶23

Brief facts of the case, is that, the petitioner was initially appointed as a Peon in Government High School, Awari, District Kanker, on a daily-wage basis by order dated 01.07.2008 issued by the Assistant Commissioner, Tribal Welfare, Kanker, and since his initial appointment he has been discharging his duties with utmost sincerity and diligence. However, all of a sudden, in the year 2022, his pay scale was reduced and his occupational status was arbitrarily changed from the post of Peon to that of a part-time Sweeper. It is significant to note that one Naresh Kumar Jain, who was also appointed as a Peon on 07.07.2008—subsequent to and junior to the petitioner—continues to hold the post of Peon without any reduction in status. As per the sanctioned set-up, there are three posts of Peon, out of which one is occupied by the said Naresh Kumar Jain on a regular basis while two posts still remain vacant; yet, without issuing any order or assigning any reason, the petitioner has been downgraded from a daily-wage Peon to a parttime employee, whereas the said Naresh Kumar Jain has

¶24

3

¶25

allegedly been regularized through a back-door method. The grievance of the petitioner is confined to the fact that he was initially appointed as a Peon and, unless any lawful modification is made in the original appointment order, he is entitled to continue on the same post, particularly when he is senior to Naresh Kumar Jain by one week. Therefore, the petitioner asserts that his arbitrary demotion from daily-wage Peon to a part-time worker without any justification is illegal, and he is entitled to be placed in the same position as the person who was appointed along with him, especially when posts of Peon are still lying vacant.

¶26

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner was initially appointed as a Peon on daily wages by order dated 01.07.2008 against a duly vacant post, and he continued to discharge his duties accordingly. However, without assigning any reason, the respondents subsequently changed his position and posted him as a part-time sweeper, thereby adversely affecting his service status. It is further submitted that the petitioner has placed on record a document indicating that several posts meant for daily-wage employees are still lying vacant in Government High School, Awari, District Kanker, and therefore, appropriate directions may be issued to the competent authorities to restore the petitioner to his earlier post of daily-wage Peon in accordance with the original appointment order dated 01.07.2008.

¶27

On the other hand, learned counsel for the State submits that at the relevant point of time no vacant post was available for

¶28

4

¶29

accommodating the petitioner; however, he does not dispute the fact that one Naresh Kumar Jain was subsequently appointed and posted as a daily-wage Peon on 22.06.2022 against the said post.

¶30

I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the material available on record.

¶31

Considering the overall facts and circumstances of the case, and further taking into account the additional documents placed on record by the petitioner, it is observed that the Principal of Government High School, Awari in Kanker has issued a communication indicating that three posts of Peon are presently vacant, therefore, in light of this material, the concerned respondent authorities are directed to duly consider the petitioner’s case for his posting as a daily-wage Peon in accordance with law and subject to fulfillment of requisite criteria.

¶32

This exercise be done within a period of 45 days from the date of receipt of copy of this order.

¶33

With this observation and direction, the writ petition is disposed of.

¶34

(Amitendra Kishore Prasad)

¶35

Judge

¶36

Raghu Jat

Bihari Ram Nishad v. State of Chhattisgarh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Bihari Ram Nishad v. 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

Pavan Kumar Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Dr. Rajesh Chandra Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Rajendra Sharma Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Prashant Kumar Vishwakarma Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Ajit Kumar Shukla Vs State of Chhattisgarh

B.L. Sahu Vs State of Chhattisgarh