Madhya Pradesh High Court
WP/1886/2024 of ROOPNARAYAN PATHAK 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 JABALPURBEFORE
HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE VIVEK AGARWALON THE 2[nd] OF FEBRUARY, 2024
WRIT PETITION No. 1886 of 2024
BETWEEN:-
1.ROOPNARAYAN PATHAK S/O SHRI JHALLOOPRASAD PATHAK, AGED ABOUT 60 YEARS,OCCUPATION: SECTION WRITER WARD NO. 15RAJNAGAR DISTRICT CHHATARPUR (MADHYAPRADESH)PRASAD PATHAK, AGED ABOUT 60 YEARS,OCCUPATION: SECTION WRITER WARD NO. 15RAJNAGAR DISTRICT CHHATARPUR (MADHYAPRADESH)
2.GEETA MISHRA W/O SHRI RAMSWAROOPMISHRA OCCUPATION: SECTION WRITERADDRESS KHAJURAHO DISTRICT (MADHYAPRADESH)MISHRA OCCUPATION: SECTION WRITERADDRESS KHAJURAHO DISTRICT (MADHYAPRADESH)
3.SATISH KUMAR PANDEY S/O HARICHARANPANDEY OCCUPATION: SECTION WRITERADDRESS WARD NO. 8 DHAWAD DISTRICT(MADHYA PRADESH)PANDEY OCCUPATION: SECTION WRITERADDRESS WARD NO. 8 DHAWAD DISTRICT(MADHYA PRADESH)
(BY SHRI PRANAY SHUKLA - ADVOCATE)
.....PETITIONERS
AND
1.THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH THROUGHTHE PRINCIPAL SECRETARY REVENUE DEPTT.VALLABH BHAWAN BHOPAL (MADHYA PRADESH)
2.THE COLLECTOR CH H ATAR PUR OFFICECHHATARPUR DISTRICT (MADHYA PRADESH)
.....RESPONDENTS
(BY SMT. SWATI ASEEM GEORGE - DEPUTY GOVERNMENT ADVOCATEFOR THE 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
Petitioners' contention is that petitioners are working as Section Writers, they are seeking benefit of GAD circular dated 07.10.2016.
Accordingly, this petition can be disposed of without commending onthe merits with a direction that if the petitioners prefer a fresh representationbefore respondent No.2 within a period of fifteen days from today alongwithcertified copy of this order, then the same shall be considered and decided byrespondents No.2, through a speaking order, strictly in terms of the GADcircular dated 07.10.2016 and also taking into consideration a fact that as towhether the engagement of the petitioners was continuous one or was with abroken period.
This Court has not expressed any opinion on the merits of the case. In above terms, this petition is disposed of.
Certified copy as per rules.
MTK
(VIVEK AGARWAL)JUDGE