_IN THE HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR (C.G.) WRITPETme>NNO. 132^/2004^ PETITIONER Digambar Patel, aged about 35 years, son of Shri Kanti Kumar Patel, resident of Rohini Puram., Near Mairi Qate, Raipur (Chhattisgarh) VERSUS RESPONDENTS .-^y ^p'^'^'" ^' ^> .-•'' ^'^'.•^ 1. State of Chhattisgarh, through, the Secretary, D^fDepartment of Aadim Jati Eyaan Anusuchitjati Vikas, Dau Kalyan Singh Bhawan, Raipur, Chhattisgarh. The Commissioner, Department of Aadira Jati Evam Anusuchit JatiVikas, Raipur'(C.G.) Asst. Com.missioner, Office of the Commissioner, Aadim Jati Evam Anusuchitjati Vikas, Raipur (C.G.) The Drawing and Disbursing Officer, Office of the Coruinissioner, Aadim Jati. Evam. AnusUGhit Jati 'Vikas, Chhatlisgarh, Raipur. 5. The Director, Aadim Jati Evam Anusychit Jafi Vikas, Ghhaftisgarh, Raipur. ,i't: WRIT PETITION UNDER ARTICLES 226/227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, 1950/:FOE ISSUANCE OF WRITIN THE NATURE OF CERTIORARI, MANDAMUS ETC. AND FQR APPROPRIATE ORDER / QRDERS, DIREeTION / DIRECTIONS. ^ — -(- XI-HG—78 'S:^':i[PTR^, ®til<-l*!G,fsldl'M1!,'!, -«fflq^T^W^---!^f---Y?^SN'N'------"-^200 3n^iTTs^ ('yrf^p^f) an^iw'fnw '^n' sn^ <?b^i^> TOnwflftn3nt?f 3Qatt-a(^ ^>T<(iCT<il'T iTFRft* 'fi( ^S^ <.f^1<^TC ^t'sffinsii^T On a mention being made, Smt. Fouzu Mirza, Shri SumiMh Bojoj, Tlie peti1ior»r has pref^ 226/227 of Ihe ConstHution o< •the order dected 25tfl/^*ll-( (Wtittpner has been rewrted ground •riwt he twas wrongfy •fhe post of Peon. The petitioncr's caae is he was qapointed os 'Farr^ cui^ vide Annexure-P/2 ddted 7-lj Wde order Anneuxre-P/3 postof Peon, Sntete-IV in •the was postBct at Adivasi Ash( provisionat seniprity list of •rt|i P/6. on 29-7-2003. as on l-4-t wos fixed at Sr.No.14. the peth'ioner was promo*^;l 6-10-20)3 on -the post of fts.3050.75-39SO-80-4590. •the case is takai upfwhewmQ. 'ner. &epu-(y 6ovt. Advocate for IheState. tf^rred •this writ petition urKter Articte of India qiNsstioning Itus correeh'iess of 61-2004 (Annoains-P/9) whereby -the from the post of Srade-IIE on Ihe p^ometed as Assistnnt Smek-III from |that hitiaHy vide ordeF AmexurB-P/l kOlowkklar'on 12-9-1991. Thereafter 2-1991 his servioes were r^ilariaed. 6-1-1994.he wwe <ypointe<l on tiw twyscale of Rs.TSO-tZ-87045^46 and (%nit Amlideeh (Sckti)> ThwBnfter, •rt|e peon wus published, yide Annexunt- 3303. in whfch ihe pelttionw's flenwrily Brwfter on the baais of •the above aentor'ity, yide order Awt®<ure-P/7 detitsd 6rade-ES in -the pay acate of Ainttxure4>^ Atfed 5-6*a30!4 •Hf da^ Aitsjstont yae --F '3^ -41'41cl-4, 8i'fll<-)<ls, feliy^<. nwyirgpn^ '^.200 3n^?r Tra^ (intg'xt'T^ an^Hw h-u* '9^T ^ti^ffi s?>*ti^ SWW<*lft(13)I^I .— pe'trtwnet^s seniorMy wwa fixeal art' S *<i!<|tirt<i)'< *)Wd'f ^%^'<f^ts«, ^ oiRffil ^n^n i ^ ^ lli.to.2i&. l-teNiB»w;A6fa wi'ttiout affordirq opperlijnrty |of ^ representntion wfa impugnf^ orcl|er dated 2SUI/28tll-6-2<Wi -the petitioner has b<»n reverted, •rt^refore/ the hnpugned oretBr be Reply has been ^ted on beho^ of •the reqwnderrts Jn whidi tt, has been mentioned Ihat wvMa!^ ^^-i^Wsmer wa ep^owteSas contmgency poad emplc^e as Swee|ier-cuni-WatdifliW on 12-^-1991 and vide orclerdated 7-12-1991 h further orders. On 6-1-1994, theO|epartwen*n(SerBaiir^ CoHmtitt^ af+er cpns'iderhig the case of *h® s services weve contmued tmtil wtitjorier, fouwl him elSgibfe fw r^ufarization oid accorduigty he <|^ r^uldriMd ^ ^ U.' '^1.. -1 ". .::''"' .;.!.^'.;'? ..' However, white conSfderihg the^eaaB of the pititiiDner^^^^^^ ^ regularization, tha Screeriing Co(nmittee committed. a inls'hAe considering thatthe«^omtnlentofjtlfepetitioner<^<m27-Z4%6. Therefbre, he is entittecl for regulei^BEeFlion. As p<sr -riie policy of •ttW (Sowmment thei"e was a bflMon r^ykxriang d c»ntin9ency;i( who was appointed after 31-12-1988| Thus;1tie SereittmgCommittee wrongty considered •the]petitioner di^ appointee of 1986, whfds, the petitiQner himaeff hos admitted in l^e petitibn that h®was ia^ointed on 12-9-1991 wid regularized on 6-^-1994. After ne-lH^anIisnWertof the Stcrte in the yean 2000, the^jpetitioner waa m tha |S*irtle of Gi^RJ-fSiT'B -5/200( -SO.OOO. ..';;;;; ^•iyiiiftUii.iaiiiSKil -+- ^^'^lNRT'T, ©'alwis,faCTl'y^ 2oo sn^n^? ('ifityi't^ sii^; ^I 1<-) 'a^n ^ti^ »*ti4* ?:<&iBWt «f^dSfl^ff -3- ^^(^N *iwcff "^ ^^^N^l^ ^-,'' • "^oifa^ ^B^TT ^: ^ WhaWayvh end •#»aeniori/tf wadf'easffiisS^^-f'din.^.-'SK.^i^yw' 2003, •the DepwtmeiTtd Pi^otion^minitteefoundftt^l^ and reoommended his name for pr^motion on 6-10-2003, •I'hei'eiufiiiM', •the Dejwrhnent recemed sesverol 4*lnP'aBTtls l'e9<u'<*m9 Pronw1wn ^ the petitioner ond on aiquiry certai^ jrpegulant^canie I®Ihe^ ro Kierefore, I^CwiaiHsaonw/iSspf^li^ 1^0.2 passsed 1l^ hnpi^ned order. I I hwe heard teamed counsel 1(or the parties. It is an admitted position •t(wt befonB peBamg Itie impuyied order. the petitjoner wes not affl>rderi opisMN'tunrty ef hearng OP itwkmg wiy representntion or no sh)»wcnuse rwtiot tias gjwan te Itifc petitioner. Even copy of the order (nhereby Ihe Sovemment ;,^,J. ./',.. ,,,.^:, r. r:';,.'.,'1 ban -that the employees<)ppoirrted(]'af1^3M2-4988t^^i^ regularized has not b^nplacedori^iccrd. Bwn hopecprd hasb^n pkuad before the Court- showing ^hat 1tie petitioner wws promoted considerffq that -the (wtitioner is fl^poin'tee of 1986. Befwe passhg tha impugnetf order, the I'esporxtai'^s ought to hen«given (yportunityr To the petitioner ihat how the prom|»tionorderwas iUegal or cgRtrory to -the record. Therefore, only on ^he gr'ound of princ^lc of rKriund justice, •the hnpugned order te M^fiQbs quoahed. Fwthis wew,l cun fortified by Ihe juc^ment of •the Hon'bte ^ex Court in 1*ie Gt.PRJ-^S/.TB —Sj!200(—50^00. j>- + '3'^'^1'1<1<-1<1; e'al^'re, fa<ii-yy WI»WliflhW<l» 260 3n^H^^ ('ply'yft dll^B ^R W* ^a»*^ ^^1 SQt^ ^*S^ th<N^^%^ •asi^ •4- ^i^^ ^^'f'^fS^ ^Fait^; ^ •affil*)-ai^iEin< ^ ^-A1 ialt^SSlWtL:.P«pWfW^^^S!S^^3t Borve df Tnarrer or Kan* vjai"^ ¥ww»unqm Sypreme Cew^Ceafs 685. Jsi the r«sult, -rtie petition impugned order is quashed. Howjevw. respondents will not bc piwWtfSSS ghwq opporhmity't'o 1+)e petitioneB,| record In accordahce wi'th law. Porties iare ehtitled for cenMf^d c^iy af ihis order. Ae petitioner is alhw»«;l. The pvw. if is moda clear •thuj- 1tw frem hwtiating 1<w enqwry aflw wcy gaasflnta- on m«#bfltaed w Sd/- L.C.Bhadoo ~ Judge ^y^ /y^. Gil J—FS(7fi-5/200( —50.000. .^ <>,-'