2024:CGHC:32924 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPC No. 4279 of 2024

1 - Ghanshyam Sen S/o Lt. Mohan Lal Sen Aged About 44 Years At C/o S.S.

Ramsir, Petrol Pump Colony, Farasgaon, District Kondagaon, Bastar, Chhattisgarh ... Petitioner versus

1 - Chhattisgarh State Women Commission Through President, At Near Kutchery Chowk, P.S.- Civil Lines, District Raipur, Chhattisgarh.

2 - Nandinee Sen W/o Late Shri Chetam Lal Sen Aged About 38 Years R/o Sen Niwas, Kota, Raipur, Ward No. 20, Ram Krishna Paramhansh Ward, P/s Saraswati Nagar, Raipur, District Raipur, Chhattisgarh ... Respondents :

For Petitioner Mr. Lukesh Kumar Mishra, Advocate (through V.C.)

(Hon'ble Shri Parth Prateem Sahu, Judge

Order on Board

28/08/2024

1. Petitioner has filed this writ petition seeking following reliefs :

10.1 The Court may kindly be pleased to pass appropriate writ(s)/order(s) and quash the arbitrary proceedings (numbered 1100/Vividh) pending before respondent No. 01, in the interest of justice.

10.2 Alternatively, the Court may kindly be pleased to direct respondent No. 01 to decide the petitioner’s representations annexed as P/1 colly and pass a speaking order in terms of the rules and regulations framed under The National Commission For Women Act, 1990, in a time framed fixed by this Hon’ble Court.

10.3 Any other relief/direction that the Court may deem fit in the facts and circumstances of the case.”

2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that respondent No. 2 has filed an application before respondent No. 1. Dispute between petitioner and respondent No. 2 is with regard to compassionate appointment in place of late father of petitioner (late father in law of respondent No. 2). Multiple proceedings are already pending in different Courts including the High Court. During pendency of matter in the High Court, complaint is filed by respondent No. 2 before respondent No. 1 on which, notice was issued to petitioner by respondent No. 1. Petitioner raised an objection with regard to maintainability of the proceedings and prayed for disposal of the same. Despite making request for supply of document before respondent No. 1, the same has not been supplied, copy of application is filed along with covering memo dated 21.08.2024. The objection submitted by petitioner is dated 29.07.2024 even then, without deciding the objection, notice is issued to petitioner for his appearance before the respondent No. 1 on 27.08.2024. In absence of supply of documents, petitioner would not be able to make suitable defense which will call serious prejudice to the interest of petitioner. Respondent No. 1 is adjudicating upon the matter which is already sub judice before the Court. Respondent No. 1 is having no jurisdiction to decide property dispute or the matter of compassionate appointment, hence, writ petition be allowed and direction be issued to respondent No. 1 to decide the representation (Annexure-P/1) by speaking order and to quash proceedings pending before respondent No. 1.

3. I have heard learned counsel for the petitioner and also perused documents annexed along with the writ petition.

4. From the pleadings made in the writ petition as also the submission of learned counsel for petitioner, it is not in dispute that based on some application / complaint submitted by respondent No. 2 before respondent No. 1, proceedings are initiated by respondent No. 1 in which petitioner was also served with the notice. Perusal of Annexure-P/1 which is application submitted by petitioner to respondent No. 1 would show that petitioner, by pleading several facts, had made a prayer that the proceedings initiated by respondent No. 1 be cancelled. Further, document annexed along with the covering memo would show that notice was issued to petitioner on

21.08.2024 for his appearance on 27.08.2024.

5. In the aforementioned facts of the case, when application / complaint is submitted by respondent No. 2 to respondent No. 1, it is for the respondent No. 1 to proceed in accordance with th