Dr. Ashok Kumar Jaiswal vs State Of Chhattisgarh
2021 Latest Caselaw 1419 Chatt

                                       -1-


                                                                            NAFR
             HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR

                             WPS No. 3860 of 2021

     Dr. Ashok Kumar Jaiswal S/o Shri Gulab Prasad Jaiswal Aged About 46
     Years Presently Posted And Working As Core Faculty Member (Panchayati
     Raj), Thakur Pyare Lal Institute Of Panchayat And Rural Development
     (Sird), Nimora, Raipur , District Raipur Chhattisgarh

                                                                  ---- Petitioner

                                     Versus

  1. State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Secretary , Department Of Panchayat
     And Rural Development, Mantralaya Mahanadi Bhawan, Atal Nagar, Nawa
     Raipur, District Raipur Chhattisgarh

  2. Director Thankur Pyare Lal Institute Of Panchayat And Rural Development
     (Sird), Nimora, Raipur, District Raipur Chhattisgarh

                                                              ---- Respondents

For Petitioner : Mr. Shashank Thakur, Advocate.

     For State                   :      Ms. Sunita Jain, GA

                      Hon'ble Shri Justice P. Sam Koshy
                               Order on Board

28/07/2021

1. The limited relief that petitioner has is for appropriate direction to the

respondents to consider his claim for regularizing him in the service of the

respondents.

2. According to the petitioner, he has been appointed under the respondents

under the Project of State Institute of Rural Development. The

appointment of the petitioner has been done as a Core Faculty

Member(Panchayati Raj). The nature of appointment was on contract

basis. The initial appointment of the petitioner was on 03.07.2009 and

which has been further continued annually till date. According to the

petitioner, the petitioner at a National Colloquium held in the city of

Hyderabad on 12-13.01.2018, it was resolved in the said colloquium that

the core faculty members recruited under the scheme and who have put in

more than two years of satisfactory service, should be regularized based

on some objective screening process. Learned counsel for the petitioner

also submits that similar projects have also been established in all the

States in India and so far as the State of Tamil Nadu is concerned, there

were two members who were working as a Core Faculty Members at the

State Institute of Rural Development, Madras who had approached the

High Court of Madras with similar relief and High Court had granted an

order in their favour directing the Institute to regularize the service of the

petitioner. According to the petitioner the judgment of the Madras High

Court in the case of Dr. C. Villi Vs. The Director and Others, in WP.

No.25636/2005 was also affirmed by the Supreme Court.

3. Further contention of the petitioner is that the service records of the

petitioner would show that his service have been outstanding all along

from the time of his appointment and he has been representing the State

as also India in various national and international conferences and

Colloquiums. Therefore, the respondents be directed to consider his claim

for being regularized in service as a Core Faculty Member.

4. From the pleadings, it appears that representation of the petitioner is still

till date not decided and is pending consideration before the authorities.

5. Given the fact that his representations are still pending consideration, the

writ petition at this juncture stands disposed of directing the respondents to

consider and decide his representation for regularization, keeping in view

the resolution that was resolved at the Colloquium held at Hyderabad and

also taking note of the judgment of the Madras High Court passed under

the similar, if not, identical factual backdrop.

6. Let an appropriate decision be taken by the respondents at the earliest

preferably within a period of four months from the date of receipt of copy of

this order.

7. With the aforesaid observations, the present writ petition stands disposed

of.

Sd/-

(P. Sam Koshy) Judge Rohit