Chhattisgarh High Court
WPS/6688/2014 of Brijraj Purohit Vs State Of Chhattisgarh And Ors. on 24 December 2014
THE HON’BLE HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR VV}! s r«1 é6%9 2014 2 Brijraj Plfoiait S/o Late ShriPETITIONER Gadadhar Purohit, aged about 63 years, Retired employee, R/o Khatkhati, Post Basna, District — Mahasamund (C.G.). VERSUS FUB1m*UOzUmEm : 1. State of Ch
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
0
Decisions referred to
In this index
0
Of the decisions it cites
Overruled / Questioned
0
No negative treatment found
Loading the citing and cited decisions…
This judgment in the centre: on the left the decisions it cites, on the right the decisions citing it. Colour is the treatment; choose a decision to open it.
\J
i
i11
IN THE HON’BLE HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARHAT BILASPURé6%9VV}!sr«12014
2014
PETITIONER
2BrijrajPlfoiaitS/oLateShriGadadharPurohit,aged about63years,Retiredemployee,R/oKhatkhati,PostBasna,District[—]Mahasamund (C.G.).GadadharPurohit,aged about63years,Retiredemployee,R/oKhatkhati,PostBasna,District[—]Mahasamund (C.G.).
VERSUS
FUB1m*UOzUmEm
:1.State of Chattisgarh,Through,TheSecretary,DepartmentofEducation,Mahanadi Bhavan, Mantralaya,NewRaipur,District—Raipur(C.G.).Through,TheSecretary,DepartmentofEducation,Mahanadi Bhavan, Mantralaya,NewRaipur,District—Raipur(C.G.).2.Collector, Mah/gwnund,eDistrict[[—]]Mahasamund (C.G.)District[[—]]Mahasamund (C.G.)/‘DistrictEducationOfflcer,MahasamundDistrictMahasamund (C G )MahasamundDistrictMahasamund (C G )
2. District[[—]]Mahasamund (C.G.)District[[—]]Mahasamund (C.G.)
WRIT PETITION UNDER ARTICLE 2? OF THECONSTITUTION OF INDIA
Deeptl
mm(u§iga§1>
‘ mmmwmwmm'ShrivastaVa,J.
’@mwm
SBHon ble Shrl[Manmdra][ Mohan]24-12 14
Shn Mano] Jaiswal,[ctiunsel][ for][ the]petitioner/s.Shri Prasunn[BhadUrI]Govt Adv[forthe][ State]Learned counsel[for][ t]e petitioner submits[that][ the][ benefit][ of]regular pay scale[has][ not]een‘granted to[the]petitioner[from][ the]Inltlal date of[apporntment]tisV'submitted[that][ earlier][ the]petitiOner‘had fied a petmon[before][ th][ s][ Court][ m][ which][ a][ direction][ was][ Issued]on28/06/11toconsiderpIttonersrepresentattonIntheIlghtoforders passed[by][ thrs][ Cou]from time to[time,]buttill datebenefithas not been granted[to][ the]etitionerto respondents[to]This Court[has][ alrea]y[issued][ a][ direction]conSIdernpetitioners [claim]nd take a[deCIswn]WithinaperiodofthreemonthsVideordedated28/06/11.lftheconcernedrespondent, obliged[to][ corn]ty[the][ order][ of][ the][ Court,][ has][ not][ taken]a‘ny’decision[inthe][ matter‘t][ en]proper[remedy][ of][ the][ petitioner][ is][ to].take appropriate steps[to][ fil]contempt petition[rather][ than][ repeating]the samepetitionThe sendpetitionisnot maintainable[and]isaccordingly dismissed,[how’][ ver][ With][ liberty][ to][ the][ petitioner][ to][ take]remedy for compliance[of][ th]direction[issued][ by][ thisCourtearlier.]
Sd/—Manindra[Mohan][ Shrivastava]Judge