^BIBBSSSIilSSISslMfiS-Ss sSSSSSSiSSSSttSs^g^yS^KS !N THE HISH €OURTOF .JUDIGATUREAT BII.^SPUR (C uuisjT pETiT|0!y NQ, emanii\umar snrivastav 1SEai :ai PETITIONER ^onofLateiannBnagwatl-'rasaatonnvastav Bssistant Graae-tl, ^ BSIi '. ' ' _ .. - ... ' . .. Bovemment, D.K. Coilege . . EBaloaa yazar, Biistrict: Raipur (Chhattisgarh) VERSUS 'State of.Chhattisaarh Through the Secretary nfr?ai?>v?a^ - It^t IV t—WtrfVMW^.I^ITtWIMWtUJW^ jrianfe &lldfRa!pur : RESPONDENTS .»•" fsyf'S^ ..^•:-"jp,>-y^s ..^^••^^ ^^^^•^' 'T«^^-^' ^ /5 -T^i<a i'sr'?~T!HT"c;C!i(-(l-idr 1^1;:, -(hiigher Educstlon) D.K Bhawan, Ralpur Ths Joint Difsctor YTressuriss St A.ccoup.ts^ Nsasr Khadi Chowk. Rainii.r . . . WRIT PETITION UNDER ARTIGLES 22S/227 OF TH6 CONSTITUTION OF iNDIA XJ-HC-22 sn^r^r R:IRi,3TI^T axiiqi-yfta ./ '-T) 3^'-<ll<(|s«l<<^^Tfl(|'J6,fs|dlti^<, 3?^1S'*/-/ 1 H|*ICTI snHlth "'""""""""'" W^ 20U RM' "' aii^igwwgfia' Hon'bleShrtA.K^PataallfcCJ 8s Hoa. SIiriFakhruddinl 16-03-2005 Heard Mr. R.S. J{ Pandey, eounsel for the AdvoGate General for the S1 The petitioner was Division ClerK. The said] Govemment aEid tbe petifij the said, GSovemment co1 petitioner thereafter worKe Clerk arid was'regularized' By an order datecj petitioher was required to period of!two years from tt^ Hindi T^rping Examinatio| Typing Exarrunation, the| increments regularly. Butj seryice book of fhe petitiof .by tne petitioner. Aggricj' made in the semce bodl . Original .Applicafion. No.5) State Administrative Tribi.1 Tribunals Act, 1985. By an order dated) Administrative Tnburial 'hit <BI<lfCT<)1-i •jltl.flT^''fel^l <Rlt<ll< Ai . - ^arf^ira^r liiswal, Si:. Advocate with Mr. 'Yogesh IpStitioner .and Mr. V.V.S. Murthy, Dy. late. ' . : ' . , • ^-orking in a private college as a Lower private college was' taken over by the |inerwas given fhe adhoc appointment in [lege' by orijer dated 16-12-1982. The [d there'oohfinao&giy as.'Lower Divlsion In Govemment service w.e.f. 17-7-1981, 31-.10-1984 of the Government^ the Ipass Hihdi Tvping Examination: within a date 31-10-1984. The petitionerpassed' 'A Qn 29-2-1985. After passing Hindi ,petitiG>ner was., drawing fais ^pay' and on 15-1-1993 an entry -was made in the aer for reeovery of the increments drawn ved by the said entiy dated 15-1-1993 k of -the petitioner, the ;petitioner filed Sl ,oi'_.1999 .befoi-e the •Madhva^^Pradesh nal constituted u.nder the Administrative 'Y ' . . ' • • ^ ." 24-5-2001, the Madhya Pradesh State Id that'the said Onginal^AppIication file'd (ift^i^) J.BI •^1:'1:.; i : 1 i ; Ki --S XI-HC-22 sn^rw f^irarsii^r rtTdfer sb*fl<!b(I '-71^ 3N''<ii<iiti^^]Tn^'j6,. fadi.y^. 3il^yi ^ach fliiCTi ai*iich """"""""'""^T;|' 200 R<)«d 3<A<1 gWliSlTfffiff s by fhe petitionerwas barri Adminisfrafive Tribunals passed by the Madhya Original Application No. E present petition under Art for appropriate relief. ATter hearing the le -no order as such hai . communicated to the p< already paid to the petitu the sei-vice book of the pet Sectian 19'cif:theA< that the person .aggrieve^ within the jurisdiction of Tribunal for the redressal passed by the corapetent the incremehts already p^ be said to be aggrieved. under Section 19 of the the Madhya Pradesh St4 recover\r having been pi Gbvernment, the' petition^: Yet the petitioner 4 the Madhya Pradesb St< recovery of the incremenl entries made in the sent proposed recovery the ]|) <nNt<-i*l1-< iHinTfr'tetA<Rl«l< ^sri^iTsn^T [d, by the provisions of Section 21 (b) of the |Act, 1985. , Aggrieved by the said order tradesh State Administrative Tribunal in fSl of 1999, the petitioner has filed the |icles 226/227 of the Constitutionof India ^med counsel fqr the parfies, we find that been passed 'bv any authority and fctitioner for recover»r of the increments ^ner. arid only an entry had been made in itionerig,this regard. ; • tmimstFative Tribunals Act; 1985 provldes by any order pertaining to any matter Tribanal may make an application to the ofhis grievance, 'Hence, until an order is luthority ofthe Qovemment for recovery of lid to the petifioner, the petitioner cannot ill the application is filed by the petitioner i.dministrative Tribunals Act, 1985 before te Administrative Tribunal, no order for ised by the competent authority of the cannot be said to have been aggrieved. ppears to have filed the application beiore .te Administrati've Tribunal apprehendinj :s from the petitioner on the basis of the ;e book of the petitioner. Since by any itifioner will be_ adversely affected,- the ('fti^^) ^[ii^^ •:^r"!*'}5^N7^3?:^"'.'^S^£i^ri '•: XI-HC-22 sn^rqiT f^TRTsn^r WBf^iT H/- K11WI sh*<|th 3^^ra:l);'Wy«Tl'y'|6,aHct|<J^< '.^ : 3ii^,'ilacft W]; 200 Rfc^, autfiorities will .have.to i's; ;|ue a show cause. notice to the petitioner before' effecting;any recove|ry of the increments already paid'fo the petitioner. ^ Since the Madhva constituted underf'the Adrri abolished during the pep) possibly remand the mat| Admmistrative.-Tribunal foi) . • We. accordingly dis^ 'under Articies 226/227 o| petitioner; ltKe peiitioner' w With the aforesaid d «ni<iIci<n-|tlWflTft'te3' iRl'KK ^'Slf^TSn^T Pradesh State Administrative Tribunal linistrative'Tribunals Act, 1985 has'been dency of this writ petition, we cannot :er- back ,to the Madhya Prade'sh State rehearing the Original Application. ose df fbis petifion iri exercise 01 -power the Constitution of India directing that before making any, recovei|y of the ir^cremehts already paid to the ll^be-given.an Opportttnitylo^show cause against the proposed reGcjveiy and theentry made in the service bdokof.thepetitionerwiU4otbegiveneffect. ; : . • Sd/- ChiefJustice -ectiQns', this petition.stands disppsed Qf. SdA Fakhruddin i Judge 7 (•a^^i^) ^•^^ m