Dismissed¶¶32

Shiv Murti Shukla v. South Eastern Coalfields Limited

Chhattisgarh HC5 May 2025WPS/5952/2017

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

High Court of Chhattisgarh at Bilaspur; WPS No. 5952 of 2017; Shiv Murti Shukla v. South Eastern Coalfields Limited and others; writ petition dismissed as infructuous; departmental enquiry completed during pendency; petitioner dismissed from service; covering memo dated 02/05/2025; supply of admitted documents to cross-examine CBI witnesses recorded in advance by Inquiring Authority; stay of departmental proceeding until finality of criminal trial; SECL Korba; I.A. No.9/2025 permission to argue in person allowed; Justice Sanjay S. Agrawal; decided 06/05/2025; NAFR.

What did the court decide?

The petitioner's application I.A. No.9/2025 for permission to argue the matter in person, not opposed by the respondents, was allowed and he was permitted to argue the matter. ¶¶22

Shiv Murti Shukla Vs South Eastern Coalfields Limited — Chhattisgarh HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Dismissed

¶¶32

Issue for consideration

Whether the respondents should be directed to provide the petitioner the admitted documents so as to enable him to cross-examine the CBI witnesses whose statements were recorded in advance by the Inquiring Authority in the departmental proceeding, pending their deposition before the trial court on the same set of evidence. +1 more

¶¶24

Ratio / Principle

The petitioner's application I.A. No.9/2025 for permission to argue the matter in person, not opposed by the respondents, was allowed and he was permitted to argue the matter.

¶¶22

Key takeaways

During the pendency of the petition the alleged departmental enquiry was completed and the petitioner was dismissed from his service; consequently the petition had become infructuous.ratio¶¶30
The petition is dismissed, having been rendered infructuous.ratio¶¶32
All other pending applications stand disposed of.ratio

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

High Court of Chhattisgarh at Bilaspur (Single Bench, Hon'ble Shri Justice Sanjay S. Agrawal), WPS No. 5952 of 2017, decided 06/05/2025 (NAFR): The petitioner, a Senior Surveyor of South Eastern Coalfields Limited facing a departmental proceeding, had sought (i) suitable orders directing the respondents to provide him the admitted documents to enable him to cross-examine the CBI witnesses whose statements were recorded in advance by the Inquiring Authority pending their deposition before the trial court on the same set of evidence, or alternately (ii) a stay of the departmental proceeding held by the Disciplinary Authority on the same set of documents/evidence and witnesses until finality of the criminal trial. During the pendency of the petition, the departmental enquiry was completed and the petitioner was dismissed from service, which the respondents conveyed by covering memo filed on 02/05/2025. Holding that the petition had thereby become infructuous, the Court dismissed it and disposed of all other pending applications; the petitioner's application (I.A. No.9/2025) for permission to argue the matter in person was allowed.

2025:CGHC:20756

NAFR

HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR

¶5

WPS No. 5952 of 2017

¶6

Shiv Murti Shukla S/o Shri Rampyare Shukla, Aged About 48 Years, Senior Surveyor Bagdewa, U G Mine, S E C L, Korba Now Posted At G M Office, Korba Area S E C L District Korba (C.G.).

¶7

... Petitioner

¶8

versus

¶9

1 - South Eastern Coalfields Limited Through Chief Managing Director (C M D) Seepat, Road, Bilaspur (C.G.)

¶10

2 - Colliery Manager And Disciplinary Authority, Bagdewa U G Mines, Korba, District Korba Chhattisgarh P. O. And P. S. Korba Chhattisgarh, District : Korba (C.G.)

¶11

3 - General Manager And Disciplinary Authority Korba Area S E C L, P. O. And P. S. Korba Chhattisgarh , District : Korba, (C.G.)

¶12

4 - Shri Uday Chatterjee, Retd. Deputy G. M., C M P D I L, 731 Indraprasth, Babur Bagh, Post Rajbati District Burdwan W. B.

¶13

5 - V. K. Kaushik Sr. Manager, Civil / Vigilance, S E C L And Presenting Officer In The Departmental Proceeding P.O. S E C L Seepat Road Bilaspur (C.G.).

¶14

... Respondent(s)

¶15

For Petitioner	: Shri Shiv Murti Shukla, appears in person.
For Respondents	: Shri V.R. Tiwari, learned Senior Advocate appears
No.1 to 3	alongwith Shri Sudhir Bajpai, Advocate.

¶16

NARESHKUMARKAMDE Digitally signedby NARESHKUMARKAMDEDate:2025.05.0618:46:30 +0530

¶17

¶18

Single Bench : Hon’ble Shri Justice Sanjay S. Agrawal

¶19

Order on Board

¶20

06/05/2025

¶21

1. Heard on I.A. No.9/2025, an application filed by the petitioner seeking permission to argue the matter in person.

¶22

2. The said application is not opposed by the respondents. The application is, accordingly, allowed and he is permitted to argue this matter.

¶23

3. By virtue of this petition, the petitioner is praying for the following reliefs at paragraph 10 as under :-

¶24

“10.1 That, this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to pass suitable Orders to the respondents to provide him the admitted documents as referred to above to enable the petitioner to cross examine the witnesses of the CBI whose statements were recorded by the Inquiring Authority in advance in the departmental proceeding, pending their deposition before the trial court on the same set of evidence. Alternately

¶25

10.2 This Court may kindly be pleased to pass suitable Orders to stay the Departmental Proceeding being held by the Disciplinary Authority into the case referred to above on the strength of same set of documents/ evidence and witness until finality of the Criminal Trial.”

¶26

4. Learned counsel appearing for the respondents by way of

¶27

covering memo, filed on 02/05/2025, submits that since the departmental enquiry has already been completed, and the petitioner has been dismissed from the service, therefore, the reliefs as claimed for by the petitioner has become infructuous.

¶28

5. Having considered the aforesaid facts and circumstances of

¶29

¶30

the case, considering further that during the pendency of this petition, the alleged departmental enquiry has been completed, while dismissing the petitioner from his service, the instant petition

¶31

has, thus, become infructuous.

¶32

6. The petition is, accordingly dismissed having been rendered infructuous.

¶33

7. All other pending applications stand disposed of.

¶34

Sd/- Sd/( Sanjay S. Agrawal ) JUDGE

¶35

Kamde

Shiv Murti Shukla v. South Eastern Coalfields Limited

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Shiv Murti Shukla v. South Eastern Coalfields Limited

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Drupat Sidar Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Vinay Kaniya Vs Shankar Ishrani

Ramnarayan Saket Vs the State of Chhattisgarh

State of Chhattisgarh Vs Surendra Pawle

State of Chhattisgarh Vs Shyam Das

Smt. Shobhna Chourasiya Vs Munnalal Agrawal