High CourtsDivision Bench(2022) 02 CHH CK 0002

Ramprasad Singh vs State Of Chhattisgarh

Chhattisgarh High Court · Decided on 1 February 2022

HON’BLE JUDGES
Arup Kumar Goswami, CJ · N.K. Chandravanshi, J
RESULT
Dismissed
CASE NUMBER
Writ Appeal No. 55 Of 2022

CourtKutchehry membership

More clarity. Every judgment.

Download court copies, explore connected cases and make more of every research session.

Loading membership options…

Ask AI about this case

AI Structured Summary

Not yet generated for this judgment

Judgment

19 paragraphs · 334 words
1.

Heard Mr. A.N. Pandey, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Mr. H.S. Ahluwalia, learned Deputy Advocate General appearing for

respondents No. 1 to 6.

2.

This appeal is presented against the order dated 14.01.2022 passed by the learned Single Judge in WPS No. 6704 of 2021, whereby the learned

Single Judge has dismissed I.A. No. 01 of 2021, by which prayer was made for interim relief of stay of an order dated 16.11.2021 issued by

respondent No. 3 â€" Collector / District Mission Coordinator, Rajiv Gandhi Siksha Mission, Surajpur.

3.

By the said order, the respondent No. 7 was appointed to the post of Circle Coordinator (Cluster Academic Coordinator) of Circle â€" Devadhi

Block -Odagi, District â€" Surajpur. The appellant was posted as Circle Coordinator (Cluster Academic Coordinator) of Circle - Semara from

22.12.2011.

4.

The substantive post of the appellant is Teacher (Panchayat).

5.

It is the contention of Mr. Pandey that respondent No. 7 is junior to him and therefore, he ought not to have been appointed as Circle Coordinator

(Cluster Academic Coordinator).

6.

Since the writ petition is pending consideration before the learned Single Judge, in order not to cause any prejudice to the parties, we would not like

to express our opinion on merits of the case.

7.

The learned Single Judge, on exercising discretion, has rejected the prayer for interim relief. In the facts and circumstances of the case, we are of

the opinion that it is not a case where such refusal has caused irreparable loss and injury to the appellant or that the order on the face of it, is not

sustainable in law.

8.

Taking that view, we find no merit in this appeal and accordingly, the writ appeal is dismissed.

9.

Before parting with the records, noticing that no date has been given by the learned Single Judge for the next posting of the case, we direct the

Registry to list this case before the learned Single Judge having the roster on 23.02.2022.