® \f V ‘ IN THE HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR 4128 WRIT PETmON (S) No. OF 2006 Vasudeo Kashinath Sawade a S/o Shri Kashinath Sawade, Aged about 54 years, Presently posted Deputy Manager (Accounts), CG Rajya Beej Avam Krishi Vikas Nigam Ltd., Raipur & R/o B-12 Phase-I, Behind Chhattisgarh Hotel, Vishal Nagar, Raipur Dist.Raipur (Chhattisgarh) PETITIONER VERSUS RESPONDENTS 1. Union of India through thefl‘ Secrtary, Ministry of Personnel Pubi vance & ension (Departmet Personn& aiing 3rd Floo Lok a Bhawan Kha Marke ' E ELHI. e lc Grie P n of el Trn) r Nyak n t NW D te of Chhattisgarh through i ecretary, Department of Agiculture, Mantralaya, Dau Kalyan Singh Bhawan, Raipur (Chhattisgarh) . State of Maya Pradesh Through the Secretary, Department of griculture, Vallabh Bhawan, Bhopal 4. Ohhattisgarh Rajya eej Avam Krishi Vikas Nigam Limited, “Beej Bhawan”, G. E. Road, Ravigram, Telibandha , Raipur District Raipur (Chhattisgarh) Through its anging Director aipur (Chhattisgarh) R 5. Managing Director, Chhattisgarh i. Rajya Beej Avam Krishi Vikas Nigam Ltd., “Beej Bhawan”, G. E. Road, Ravigram, Telibandha, Raipur District Raipur (Chhattisgarh) Sta ’ S r 3 dh " A B Ma ICLE 226 ISSUANCE CF WRIT ANDAMUS PROHIBITI CTION 013 CONSTITUTION OF‘ INDIA FOR ATURE OF CERTIORAR R lRECTlONS, ORDER OR ORDERS: OTHER SUITABLE WRIT O WRITS DIRE D OF I M T N I T XI—HC-78 MW, §i4 HI §,W .‘ W m “ € { 9 W O .mézEin 200g If,fétriEh‘ m WWW WW WW aamm 25-8-2006 mmwm Shri Manindra Shrivastav Khan, Advocate for the petitioner. Shri Bhishma Kinger, CI respondent No. 1. Shri Sumesh Bajaj, Govt. A No.2. Shri Rajeev Sinivastava, M.P.] respondent No.3. LA. No.7882/2006, appli< record is allowed. Documents alt Heard learned counsel for t' By the instant petition, t1 Deputy Manager (Accounts) in t1 Krishi Vikas Nigam Ltd, har recommendation for allocation K Madhya Pradesh is illegal, to qi whereby the petitioner has beer, ' Pradesh State Agro Industries E restrain the respondents from relJ to hand over the charge and res the case of the petitioner for guidelines. is that after reorganization of the The case of the petitioner State, by a tentative final alld cation list, the services jof the petitioner, who is working as I )eputy Manager (Accounts) were a, Sr. Advocate with Shri Afroj :ntral Government Counsel for tdvocate for the State] respondent Panel Lawyer for the State of :ation for taking documents on taken on record. he parties. 1e petitioner, who is working as re Chhatn'sgarh Rajya Beej Avam played to declare that the if the petitioner to the State of lash the order dated 20—7—2006 relieved to join in the Madhya 3evelopment Corporation Ltd, to Leving or compelling the petitioner pondents be directed to consider allocation consistent with the P.T.O. Wm (W) XI—HC—78 3am,m,W WW. FF; 200 WW(W) WWW WWW mmwm ko€~ WW§WW a;mmm allocated to the Madhya R‘adesh State Agro Industries Development Corporation Ltd.. Thereafter, the petitioner made a representation for his allocation to the State of Chhattisgarh, in place of the petitioner the services of Prakash Kulkarni, Deputy Manager (Accounts) be allocated to the M,P. State Agro Industries Development Corporation Ltd., and both of them gave mutual :onsent. Same was placed before the Kapoor Committee, but on account of some departmental enquiry pending against the petitioner in the State of M.P., the said request was not accepted and the impugned order Annexure-P/ 1 rejecting the petitioner’s representation was passed by the Managing Director. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that now recommendation of the Kapoor 30mmittee has been sent to the Central Government for its approval. In the meantime, the petitioner wasirelieved by the Chhattisgarh Rajya Beej Avam Krishi ‘ s. iVikas Nigam Ltd, vide order dated 20th July 2006. In pursuance / 3f that, the petitioner reported before the M.P. State Agro [ndustries Development Corporation Ltd.. However, vide letter Annexure-PX/ 1 dated 28-7-20(t6 the Managing Director has refused to allow the petitioner tc join his services on the ground \ that till the final allocation list is passed, it is didicult to take the petitioner on duty. The petitioner has already been relieved and he reported before the Madhya Pradesh State Agro Industries Development Corporation, Ltd., even as per the tentatiVe final allocation list, Chhattisgarh Rajya Beej Avam Krishi Vikas: Nigam Limited and the Madhya Pradesh State Agro Industries XI—HC-78 HW,W,W :Tnq?aT§iaqTa;‘. o Wm (W) Warm wmm mataf%am -a3-— Development Corporation Ltd, ar‘ Lo join at the respective place pending consideration and. repor! pending consideration before the 30mmittee was constituted in 'representations filed by various e the report of Kapoor Committ Government or order of hal all Director of the Madhya Pradesh E Comoration Ltd, was not entitle his duties as per the tentative nnz In the circumstances, the allow the petitioner to join his Pradesh and that joining will be issued by the Central Goven Government accepts the repre allocation of services of the petiti then the. petitioner will be en Chhattisgarh and join, as on aco the Central Government dithoi functioning of the Corporation. Committee were recorded on 29— months’ time have elapsed, there Ministry of Personnel Public Grit Personnel 8r, Training) to pass ap} 3f the final allocation list at the eé WWifWW aawm t expected to allow the employees even if the representations are : of the Kapoor Committee is also Central Government. The Kapoor order to decide and settle the mployees of the Corporation. Till ee is accepted by the Central acation is passed, the Managing :tate Agro Industries Development d to refuse the petitioner to join 11 allocation list. Managing Director is directed to duties in the State of Madhya subject to the final allocation list the Central sentation of the petitioner for oner to the State of Chhattisgarh, titled to come to the ' State of aunt of not passing final order by lties are arising in day-to—day The minutes of the Kapoor" 12-2005 and since then about 8 fore, respondent No.1- Secretary, :vance 8a Pension (Deparunent of )ropriate order regarding issuance Lrliest, in accordance with law. Iment. In case, P.T.O. XI-HC-78 3a W, Wm,W WW ....... . Ha 200 WW(W>