Diwakar Prasad Gautam vs South Eastern Coalfields Limited
2021 Latest Caselaw 2675 Chatt

                                      1

                                                                      NAFR
             HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR

                    Writ Petition (S) No. 5327 of 2021

     Diwakar Prasad Gautam S/o Late Mahesh Prasad Gautam, Aged
     About 60 Years, R/o Q. No. B 1/141, Urjanagar Colony, Post Office
     S E C L Gevra, Dsitrict Korba, Chhattisgarh

                                                              ---- Petitioner

                                  Versus

   1. South Eastern Coalfields Limited Through Chairman Cum Managing
      Director, South Eastern Coalfields Limited, Head Quarter, Seepat
      Road, Police Station Sarkanda, District Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh
      495006

   2. Chairman Cum Managing Director, South Eastern Coalfields Limited,
      Head Quarter, Seepat Road, Police Station Sarkanda, District
      Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh 495006

   3. General Manager (P / A) South Eastern Coalfields Limited, Head
      Quarter, Seepat Road, Police Station Sarkanda, District Bilaspur,
      Chhattisgarh 495006

   4. Chief General Manager, South Eastern Coalfields Limited, Gevra
      Area, District Korba, Chhattisgarh

   5. Deputy General Manager, South Eastern Coalfields Limited, Gevra
      Project, Gevra Area, District Korba, Chhattisgarh

                                                          ---- Respondents

For Petitioner : Mr. Chandresh Shrivastava, Advocate For Respondents : Mr. Sudhir Kumar Bajpai, Advocate

Hon'ble Shri Justice P. Sam Koshy Order On Board 04.10.2021

1. The grievance of petitioner in the present writ petition is the inaction

on the part of respondents in not reconsidering the order of

termination dated 29.12.2006.

2. The facts of the case in brief are that the petitioner herein was

working under the respondents as a Senior Overman when on

account of conviction from the Special CBI Court the petitioner stood

terminated from service on 29.12.2006. The basis of termination from

service was the conviction by the Special CBI Court on 08.12.2006.

Thereafter the petitioner preferred an appeal against the judgment of

conviction before the High Court vide Criminal Appeal No. 889/2006

which finally stood allowed vide judgment dated 24.05.2021 and the

the judgment of conviction was set aside and the petitioner was

acquitted of the charges. Meanwhile, the petitioner is said to have

crossed the age of superannuation on 20.04.2021. Thereafter, the

petitioner made a representation to the respondent authorities vide

Annexure P-1 to reconsider the order of termination in the light of the

judgment of acquittal dated 24.05.2021. However, till date no

decision has been taken by the respondents.

3. The contention of the counsel for petitioner is that the order of

termination was solely based upon the judgment of conviction dated

08.12.2006. The department has not conducted any inquiry against

the petitioner. Thus, the very basis of termination was the conviction

which no longer exists as on date by virtue of the judgment of

acquittal dated 24.05.2021. In the light of the judgment of acquittal

having been passed by the High Court, the very basis upon which the

petitioner's service was terminated no longer exists and therefore the

order of termination needs to be reconsidered/recalled and the

petitioner has to be given appropriate consequential benefits including

post retiral benefits since he has now crossed the age of

superannuation.

4. Given the aforesaid factual matrix of the case, the writ petition at this

juncture stands disposed of directing the respondents 2 to 5 to take

an appropriate decision on the claim of petitioner for reconsidering the

order of termination dated 29.12.2006 in the light of the judgment of

acquittal dated 24.05.2021 at the earliest preferably within a period of

90 days from the date of receipt of copy of this order.

Sd/-

(P. Sam Koshy) Judge Khatai