’V‘? w ‘ IN THE HIGH COUKI‘ ‘OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WRIT PETITION (S) No. é9 3C”) OF 2010 BN ETWEE / Dr. Pramod Singh S/o Late Shri Krishna Pal Singh, aged about 57 years, posted as Joint Director (suspended) , Directorate , Health Services, D.K.S. Bhawan, Raipur , R/o D—4, Shanti Nagar, Raipur (CG). / 1. The State of Chhattisgarh, through the Seretary, Department of Health and Family Welfare, D.K.S. Bhawan, Raipur (CG). 2. The under Secretary, Department of Health and Family Welfare, State of Chhattisgarh, D.K.S. Bhawan, Raipur (CG). / - + / , /‘ 3. The Director, Directorate o Health Services, D.‘S. f K .T PETITION U A 226 or ' consITITUTIon or mnIA 1. Particulars of the petitioner: As stated in the cause title. PETITIONER AND c , HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WRIT PETITION (S) No. 6930 of2010 : Dr. Pramod Singh. VERSUS SB: Hon’ble Shri Satish K. Agnihotri. J. Present: Shri Awadh Tripathi, Advocate for the petitioner. Shri Praveen Das, Dy. G.A. for the State/respondents. ORDER ORAL (Passed on 29‘ day of November, 2010) Case of the petitioner is that against the order of suspension dated 26.12.2009 (Annexure P/I), the petitioner has preferred an appeal before the respondent No. 1 0n 11.03.2010 (Annexure P/7) but till date, no decision has been taken on the said appeal. Shri Tripathi submits that he does not want to press any other relief, except that the respondent authorities may be directed to consider and decide his pending appeal within a stipulated period. Shri Das, learned-Deputy Government Advocate appearing for the State/respondents submits that there is no dispute with regard to the above stated well settled position of law. However, it is not clear asto whether the appeal preferred by the petitioner has been decided or not. He further submits that if the appeal has not been considered and decided, the same shall be decided as expeditiously r as possible. It is well settled that a statutory representation or appeal has to be decided within a reasonable time i.e. within 3 to 6 months. A seven RESPONDENTS : The State of Chhattisgarh & Others. WRIT PETITION U/A 226 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA Judges Bench 0f the Supreme Court, in S.S.Rath0re v. State of Madhya Pradesh] , observed as under: “17. Redressal of grievances in the hands of the departmental authorities taken an unduly long time That is so on account ofthe fact that n0 attention is ordinarily bestowed over these matters and they are not considered to be governmental business of substance. This approach has to be deprecated and authorities on whom power is vested to dispose of appeals and revisions under the Service Rules must dispose of such matters as expeditiously as possible. Ordinarily, a \ period of three to six months should be the outer limit. That would discipline the system and keep the public servant away from a protracted period of litigation.” A ‘In View of the foregoing, the respondent authorities are directed that in the event, the appeal preferred by the petitioner is pending consideration, the same shall be considered and decided in accordance with law, as expeditiously as possible, preferably within a period of six weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. Consequently, the writ petition is allowed to the above extent. Sd/- c, Satish K. Agnihotri‘ Judge Amit a_ '(1989) 4 scc 582