Mohammad Mustafa Khan Vs State Of Chhattisgarh

¶1

-1-

¶2

2025:CGHC:36696

¶3

NAFR

¶4

HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR

¶5

WPS No. 4716 of 2017

¶6

Mohammad Mustafa Khan S/o Shri G. M. Khan, Aged About 43 Years Occupation Training Officer I T I Bhilai, R/o Maruti Residency A - 26 Amlidih Raipur Chhattisgarh.

¶7

... Petitioner

¶8

versus

¶9

1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Secretary, Manpower, Employment, Skill Development, Technical Education, Mahanadi Bhawan, Mantralaya, Capital Complex, New Raipur, District Raipur Chhattisgarh.

¶10

2 - Director, Employment And Training Skill Development, Technical Education And Employment, Directorate, Indrawati Bhawan, New Raipur, District Raipur Chhattisgarh.

¶11

3 - Govt. Industrial Training Institutes, Bhilai, Through Its Principal, Got. Industrial Training Institutes, Bhilai, Khursipar, Post Khursipar, Police Staion Khursipar, District Durg Chhattisgarh.

¶12

4 - Joint Director Training, Industrial Training Institutes, Regional Office, Street No. 4, New Shanti Nagar, Raipur, District Raipur Chhattisgarh.

¶13

... Respondent(s)

¶14

For Petitioner : Mr. Abhyuday Tripathi, Advocate For State : Ms. Shailja Shukla, Deputy Government Advocate

¶15

Hon'ble Shri Justice Rakesh Mohan Pandey Order on Board

¶16

28.07.2025

¶17

This writ petition has been filed with the following relief(s):-

¶18

“10.1 Issue a writ, order or direction commanding

¶19

-2-

¶20

the respondent to absorb the petitioner in the respondent on regular basis on the post of Training Officer (Trade Welder), Government Industrial Training Institute, Bhilai, District Durg and also be allowed to continue on the said post.

¶21

10.2 Pass such order and further order which the Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper on the facts and in circumstances of the case.

¶22

10.3 The Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased be pleased to set aside the order dated 07.09.2017 (Annexure P-9) and the petitioner may kindly be permitted to continue on the said post. ”

¶23

Brief facts of the present case are that the petitioner is substantively holding the post of Welder Grade III and is currently posted at ITI Bhilai. He was initially appointed as Training Officer (Welder Grade III) through a duly conducted interview, conducted on 13/09/1996, and was appointed on 19/12/1997 on a contractual basis, with joining on 22/12/1997. His contractual service has been extended from time to time, and he has continuously worked on the said post for more than 20 years. Experience certificates were issued to the petitioner for his service period from ITI Kurud and ITI Bhilai. His last known contract extension was granted on 09/09/2016, which was valid for one year or until regular appointments are made. As per the State Government Circular dated 05/03/2008, employees appointed between 01/01/1989 and 31/12/1997 are eligible for regularisation under the guidelines laid down by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in State of Karnataka vs. Uma Devi [(2006) 4 SCC 1].

¶24

1. Further, the Department of Technical Education issued a letter dated 07/04/2012 recommending the regularisation of such contract employees. Despite this, no steps were taken by the respondent authorities. The petitioner had earlier approached the High Court by filing WPS No. 2757/2005, wherein this Court directed that the petitioner shall not be removed till regular appointments are made. The petition was later withdrawn with liberty to seek an appropriate

¶25

-3-

¶26

remedy. In a similar case (WPS No. 4393/2016), the High Court had granted interim protection against termination to other similarly situated persons. The petitioner is now aged about 43 years and prays for continuation in service and regularisation on the post of Training Officer (Welder) in light of his longstanding service and existing legal framework.

¶27

1. During the course of hearing, it was brought to the notice of this Court that the issue involved in the present matter is squarely covered by the decision rendered in WPS No. 1275 of 2018 (Smt. Saroj Singh v. State Of Chhattisgarh) & other connected matters decided on 01.05.2025 , wherein similar facts and legal issues were involved.

¶28

1. In view of the above, the instant writ petition is disposed of reserving liberty in favour of the petitioner to make a representation before the concerned authorities within a period of 30 days and in turn, the authorities concerned are directed to decide it within a period of 120 days from the date of receipt of a copy of this order keeping in mind the decision rendered in the matter of Smt.

¶29

Saroj Singh (supra) .

¶30

1. Accordingly, this writ petition is hereby disposed of .

¶31

Sd/- (Rakesh Mohan Pandey) Judge

¶32

NADIM

Mohammad Mustafa Khan v. State Of Chhattisgarh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mohammad Mustafa Khan 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

Cases cited

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Pritam Das Manikpuri Vs State Of Chhattisgarh

Rajesh Mishra Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Arti Shukla Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Smt.Sharda Vs Mukesh Thakur and Another

Shyam Narayan Gupta Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Sunil Kumar Gupta Vs State of Chhattisgarh