Madhya Pradesh High Court
WP/1816/2024 of PRAHLAD CHOURASIYA Vs THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH on 2 February 2024
COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH AT JABALPUR BEFORE HON'BLE SHRI
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESHAT JABALPUR
BEFORE
HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE VISHAL MISHRAON THE 2[nd] OF FEBRUARY, 2024
WRIT PETITION No. 1816 of 2024
BETWEEN:-
PRAHLAD CHOURASIYA S/O SHRI RAMNATHCHOURASIYA, AGED ABOUT 68 YEARS, R/O RAMJIWARD MANDLA TEHSIL AND DISTRICT MANDLA(MADHYA PRADESH)
(BY SHRI ANAND CHOURASIYA - ADVOCATE)
.....PETITIONER
AND
1.THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH THROUGHPRINCIPAL SECRETARY DEPARTMENT OFFOREST MANTRALAYA, VALLABH BHAWAN,BHOPAL (MADHYA PRADESH)PRINCIPAL SECRETARY DEPARTMENT OFFOREST MANTRALAYA, VALLABH BHAWAN,BHOPAL (MADHYA PRADESH)
2.THE MANAGING DIRECTOR, MADHYA PRADESHRAJYA VAN VIKAS NIGAM LIMITED PANCHANAN5TH FLOOR MALVIYA NAGAR BHOPAL (MADHYAPRADESH)RAJYA VAN VIKAS NIGAM LIMITED PANCHANAN5TH FLOOR MALVIYA NAGAR BHOPAL (MADHYAPRADESH)
3.DIVISION MANAGER, MADHYA PRADESH RAJYAVAN VIKAS NIGAM LIMITED MOHGAONPARIYOJNA MANDLA (MADHYA PRADESH)VAN VIKAS NIGAM LIMITED MOHGAONPARIYOJNA MANDLA (MADHYA PRADESH)
4.THE REGIONAL MANAGER, MADHYA PRADESHRAJYA VAN VIKAS NIGAM LIMITED MOHGAONPARIYOJNA MANDLA (MADHYA PRADESH)RAJYA VAN VIKAS NIGAM LIMITED MOHGAONPARIYOJNA MANDLA (MADHYA PRADESH)
.....RESPONDENTS
(SHRI G.P. SINGH - GOVERNMENT ADVOCATE FOR RESPONDENTNO.1/STATE)
This petition coming on for admission this day, the court passed the following:
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.
ORDER
The present petition has been filed seeking the following reliefs :
7.1 That, this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to issue a writ ofMandamus and direct the respondent no.-3 to pass a reasoned andspeaking order as per the directions of order dated 04-07-1997(Anx-P/4) passed by the Regional General Manager of Rajya VanVikas Nigam.
7.2 That, this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to issue a writ ofMandamus and direct the respondent no.-3 to decide the pendingrepresentations of the petitioner by passing a reasoned andspeaking order.
7.3 That, this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to issue a writ ofMandamus and direct the respondent no.-3 to decide the claim ofpetitioner in respect of salary of suspension period, salary till theage of superannuation, promotions, time pay scale, pension andother retiral dues as per law.
7.4 That, any other writ direction order as may be deemed fit in thecircumstance may also be awarded along with the cost of litigation.
2. The case of the petitioner is that he was appointed on the post ofFieldsman vide order dated 18.12.1976 and joined his services on 02.01.1977.When the petitioner was posted at Devi Dadar Depot two pages of Transit Passhas been misplaced. The petitioner was placed under suspension vide orderdated 06.03.1990. The respondent No.3 vide order dated 07.03.1990 sent awritten complaint to the Superintendent of Police, Mandla for registration ofcriminal offence against the responsible persons. The FIR was registeredagainst the petitioner and other co-accused. After completion of investigation,charge-sheet was filed and criminal case No.893/1991 was registered. Duringthe pendency of criminal case the suspension of the petitioner was revoked videorder dated 28.12.1994. Thereafter, the petitioner was posted at Head Officevide order dated 23.01.1996. After completion of departmental enquiry,petitioner was dismissed from service and the suspension period of thepetitioner was considered from 06.03.1990 to 27.12.1994. Being aggrieved bythe order dated 19.11.1996 the petitioner preferred an appeal. The appeal filed by the petitioner was allowed vide order dated 04.07.1997. Vide order dated22.12.2022 the petitioner was acquitted from the said criminal case. Thereafter,he preferred representations dated 06.09.2023 and 31.07.2023, but to no avail.An innocuous prayer is made to direct the respondent No.2 to consider anddecide the pending representations.
3. Counsel appearing for the State has no objection to the limited prayermade by the counsel for the petitioner.
4. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, the petition isdisposed of directing the respondent No.2 to consider and decide thepetitioner's pending representations (Annexure P/6) as expeditiously as possiblefrom the date of receipt of certified copy of this order and communicate theoutcome to the petitioner.
5. Needless to mention that this Court has not expressed any opinion on themerits of the case.
6. Accordingly, the petition is disposed of.
7. Certified copy as per rules.
THK
(VISHAL MISHRA)JUDGE