S.B (Service Matter) IN THE HON’BLE HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR (CHHATTISGARH) WRIT PETITIONS No. ' 8? ’ . ~i2663 PETITIONER: / Vijay Kumar Diwakar, son of Late Ramdas Diwakar, aged about 34 years, caste satnami, residence of village Godikala (Kontapara) Post Diwanpur, Tahsil and Police Station Patthalgaon, District Jashpur, Chhattisgarh. VerSuS Respondents /’ 1. State of Chhattisgarh, Through Secretary, Panchayat and Rural Development Department, Raipur, D.,K.S. Bhawan, Mantralaya, Raipur, Chhattisgarh. . Collector, Jashpur,-District Jaspur, Chhattisgarh. /3. Chief Executive Offlcer, Zila Panchayat, Jashpur, District Jashpur, Chhattisgarh. /4. Block Education Officer, Patthalgaon, District Jashpur, Chhattisgarh. WRIT PETITION UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR Hon’ble Mr. Justice Pritinker Diwaker Writ Petition (S) No. 1897/2009 PETITIONER Vijay Kumar Diwakar Versus RESPONDENT State of Chhattisgarh and others ri J.K. Saxena, counsel for the petitioner. Smt. Smita Ghai PL for respondents 1, 2 & 4. Shri Akhilesh Kumar counsel for respondent No.3. WRTI PETITION UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF THE CONSTITUION OF INDIA 0 R D E R (15.07.2011) Challenge in this writ petition is to the order dated 6.6.2008 (Annexure P-1) passed by respondent No.3 (Chief Execdtive Officer, Jila Panchayat, Jashpur) [henceforth “respondent No.3” for convenience] denying the salary of th'e petitioner for the period between 15.8.2006 and 23.1 .2007 applying the principle of ‘no work no pay’. 2. Facts of the case in short are that vide order dated 3.8.2006 (Annexure P-2) the petitioner along with other persons was promoted to the post of Shiksha Karmi Grade ll from that of Shiksha Karmi Grade lll and posted at Primary School, Siharbud, Block Bagicha and pursuant to a " the said order he was relieved from Primary School, Surangpani, Block Patthalgaon on 14.8.2006 vide Annexure P-3, for Primary School, Siharbud, Block Bagicha. Further case of the petitioner is that o'n 14.8.2006 itself he gave his joining at Block Kansabel because Primary School, Siharbud falls in Block Kansabel and not in Block Bagicha. However, joining of the petitioner was not accepted at Block Kansabel on the ground that in the promotion order of the petitioner Block was s mentioned as Bagicha and not Kansabel. On 17.8.2006, the petitioner gave his joining at Block Bagicha but the same was also refused and ultimately he was left .with no other option but to go back to Patthalgao‘n. On 17.8.2006 the petitioner again reported i‘n the office of Block Education Officer, Patthalgaon requesting that as he was not t Sh a @ permitted to join at Siharbud and that his place of posting has not been made clear, he may not be relieved. On 18.8.2006 vide Annexure P-5 the petitioner requested respondent No.3 herein that on account of mistake of the authorities, he has not been permitted to join anywhere and as one post is lying vacant at Middie School, Khardodi. he may be posted there. Further case of the petitioner is that pursuant to this request, on 22.1.2007 vide Annexure P-6 an order was passed amending the earlier posting order of the petitioner at Siharbud and he was posted at Middle School, Khardodi, Patthalgaon. Immediately after receiving this order, Ion 24.1.2007 the petitioner gave his joining at Middle School, Khardodi and is working thereat. -2_ 3. Counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has not been paid his salary for the period between 15.8.2006 and 23.1.2007 applying the principle of ‘no work no pay' and as due to the mistake of the authorities he could not join his duties, order dated 6.6.2008 (Annexure P—1) denying salary for the aforesaid period is totally unjustified. He submits that the petitioner made several representations before passing of the order dated 6.6.2008 (Annexure P—1) but to no avail making the petitioner run from pillar to post for no rhyme or reason. According to the counsel for the petitioner, the petitioner cannot be held to be at fault for the mistake of the respondents and as such the order impugned is liable to be set aside. ,4. Denying the contention of the petitioner’s counsel, it has been argued by the counsel for the respondent No.3 that it was not aware of the fact that any mistake was committed in mentioning the place of petitioner’s posting and as soon as it came to know about the said mistake, on 22.1.2007 an order (Annexure P—6) was passed correcting the place of posting pertaining to’the petitioner. On being asked, counsel for the respondent No.3 failed to satisfy this Court as to on what basis order dated 22 1 2007 has been passed Counsel for the respondent No 3 further submits that the petitioner has failed to fle any ‘ acknowledgement to show that he ever gave his jomrng at Kansabel or Bagxcha. Counsel for the respondents/State however submits that the - t8 ‘ , ‘\ ,3- €2) petitioner ought to have approached the Commissioner, by way of appeal in stead of approaching this Court tirst. 5. From the facts and circumstances of the case it appears that certain evidence is required to be Ied by the parties and therefore in the considered opinion of this Court, it would be just and proper and in the interest of justice if the matter is adjudicated by the Commissioner, Sarguja keeping in view the difficulties being faced by the petitioner and aiso considering the explanation offered by respondent No.3. 6. In this view of the matter, the petition is disposed of with a direction to the petitioner to approach the Commissioner, Sarguja within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of copy of this order who in turn, after examining the facts and circumstances of the case and if required by permitting the parties to lead additional evidence, oral or documentary as the case may be, shall pass appropriate order within a \ further period of two months. I Sd/- i 4 Pritinker Diwaker i f9 Judge