SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Article Pause Article
judgment-img

HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH
INDARSAI BHUARYA – Appellant
Versus
STATE OF CHHATTISGARH and ANR – Respondent
WPS 2582/2010



Advocates:
['AJAY SHRIVASTAVA', 'BK CHAKRABARTY', '', 'G P MATHUR', 'SATYA KUMAR MANDLOI', 'VINOD KUMAR SHARMA', 'A G']

1

NAFR

HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR

Writ Petition (S) No.2582 of 2010

Indarsai Bhuarya, S/o Shri Navalsingh Bhuarya, Aged about 53 years,

working as Lecturer at Govt. Higher Secondary School, Mangchuwa,

District Durg, R/o Village Bharritola, Post Mangchuwa, Block & Tehsil

Daundi Lohara, District Durg (C.G.)

---- Petitioner

Versus

1. State of Chhattisgarh, through the Secretary, School Education

Department, D.K.S. Bhawan, Raipur (C.G.)

2. The Director/Commissioner, Lok Shikshan Sanchanalaya, Raipur

(C.G.)

---- Respondents

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

For Petitioner:

Mr. Vinod Kumar Sharma, Advocate.

For Respondents/State: Mr. Avinash Singh, Panel Lawyer.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Hon'ble Shri Justice Sanjay K. Agrawal

Order On Board

19/07/2021

1. Proceedings of this matter have been taken-up through video

conferencing.

2. Mr. Vinod Kumar Sharma, learned counsel appearing for the

petitioner, would submit that the petitioner was promoted on the post

of Lecturer (Political Science) by order dated 28-8-2009, but by the

impugned order dated 22-4-2010 (Annexure P-1), his order of

promotion has been cancelled without giving opportunity of hearing to

him which is in teeth of the principles of natural justice and is liable to

be set aside.

3. Mr. Avinash Singh, learned Panel Lawyer appearing for the State /

respondents, would support the impugned order and would submit

that the petitioner was not trained and qualified for the post of Lecturer

2

(Political Science), therefore, his promotion order has been set aside.

4. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and considered their rival

submissions made herein-above and also went through the record

with utmost circumspection.

5. Undisputedly, the petitioner was promoted on the post of Lecturer

(Political Science) on 28-8-2009 in the pay-scale of ₹ 5,500-9,000/-

(revised pay band ₹ 9,300-34,800/-, grade pay ₹ 4,300/-), but by the

impugned order, his promotion order has been cancelled on the

ground of not being trained on the said post. Once the order of

promotion has been granted in favour of the petitioner, that could not

have been withdrawn without affording reasonable opportunity of

being heard and without issuing notice to the petitioner, as it involves

civil consequences of taking his right to hold the post of Lecturer

(Political Science). Accordingly, the impugned order dated 22-4-2010

(Annexure P-1), qua the petitioner, is set aside. However, the

respondents are at liberty to proceed in accordance with law.

6. The writ petition is allowed to the extent indicated herein-above. No

order as to cost(s).

Sd/-

(Sanjay K. Agrawal)

Judge

Soma

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top