Dr. Harcharan Singh Bhatia vs State Of Chhattisgarh And Ors
2022 Latest Caselaw 1542 Chatt

                                  -1-




         HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR
                               Order Sheet
                        WPS No. 848 of 2013
 Dr. Harcharan Singh Bhatia Versus State Of Chhattisgarh And Ors.




24/03/2022         Shri Sabyasachi Bhaduri, counsel for the petitioner.
                   Shri Gurudev I Sharan, Govt. Advocate for the State.

                   Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is
             claiming that period of service of petitioner be counted from his initial
             date of of appointment i.e. 22.12.1986 as emergency appointee. He
             contented that the petitioner was appointed in the erstwhile State of
             Madhya Pradesh based on the Educational Services (Collegiate
             Branch) Recruitment Rules (MP), 1967 (for short " Rules of 1967").
             Several other Assistant Professors have been appointed who, after
             reorganization of State of Madhya Pradesh, were working in the State
             of Madhya Pradesh have filed writ petitions seeking similar relief.
             Provision of Rules of 1967 was considered by High Court of Madhya
             Pradesh and it was decided in favour of the petitioners therein that
             their services is to be counted from their initial date of appointment
             interpreting the words "regular appointment" and the same question
             is to be decided in this writ petition also. He submits that order
             passed in writ petition by Single Bench of Madhya Pradesh High
             Court was challenged in appeal by the State in Writ Appeal No.655 of
             2012 (State of Madhya Pradesh & Anr. Vs. Dr. Ramesh Chandra
             Dixit), which came to be dismissed by a detailed order. Case of the
             petitioner is squarely covered by judgment passed by Division Bench
             of Madhya Pradesh High Court.
                   Learned State counsel submits that the copy of judgment
                               -2-




          passed by Division Bench of Madhya Pradesh High Court is just now
          given to him and seeks time to go through the same and make his
          submission. He submits that he will also verify the position as to
          whether the State of Madhya Pradesh has further challenged the
          judgment passed in WA No. 655 of 2012 before the Apex Court or
          not.

                 As prayed by learned counsel for the respondents/State, list

this case after two weeks.

Sd/----/--/- (Parth Prateem Sahu) Judge

Praveen