Chattisgarh High Court
Sunil Dutt Pandey vs State Of Chhattisgarh on 4 May, 2022
1
NAFR
HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR
Writ Appeal No. 227 of 2022
Sunil Dutt Pandey S/o Late Pratap Shankar Pandey, aged about 60
years, working as Block Education Officer, Mainpat, District Surguja,
Chhattigarh.
---- Appellant
Versus
1. State of Chhattisgarh, Through Secretary, Education Department,
Mahanadi Bhawan, Mantralaya, New Raipur (C.G.).
2. Under Secretary, Government of Chhattisgarh, School Education
Department, Mahanadi Bhawan, Mantralaya, New Raipur (C.G.)
3. The Divisional Commissioner, Surguja Division, School Road Guru
Nanak Chowk, Ambikapur, District Surguja (C.G.)
4. The Divisional Joint Director, Public Instructions, Surguja,
Ambikapur, District Surguja (C.G.)
5. Sanjay Guhe, Working as Assistant Professor (Original Post
Principal), State Academic Research and Training Council, Raipur,
District Raipur (C.G.).
---- Respondents
(Cause-title taken from Case Information System)
For Appellant : Mr. C. Jayant K. Rao, Advocate.
For Respondents No. 1 to 4 : Mr. Gagan Tiwari, Deputy Government
Advocate.
Hon'ble Shri Arup Kumar Goswami, Chief Justice
Hon'ble Shri Justice Rajendra Chandra Singh Samant, Judge
Judgment on Board
Per Arup Kumar Goswami, Chief Justice
04.05.2022
Heard Mr. C. Jayant K. Rao, learned counsel for the appellant. Also
heard Mr. Gagan Tiwari, learned Deputy Government Advocate,
appearing for respondents No. 1 to 4.
2. This writ appeal is presented against an order dated 27.09.2021
passed by the learned Single Judge in Writ Petition (S) No. 4632 of 2021,
by which the learned Single Judge rejected the prayer for interim relief,
holding as follows:
"By now by way of interim relief, the petitioner has
sought for stay of the impugned orders Annexure P-1 &
P-2. Annexure P-1 is dated 28.05.2021 and Annexure P-
2 is dated 30.05.2021. Vide the two orders, the
respondents had initially kept in abeyance the earlier
orders passed, on 21.05.2021 and subsequently the
charge of the District Education Officer, Ambikapur has
been given to the respondent No. 5. The present writ
petition has been filed only on 19.08.2021 i.e. almost
more than three months after the impugned order was
passed. Meanwhile, the impugned orders have already
come into force and it stands implemented.
Given the said facts, no case for grant of interim
relief has been made out. I.A. No. 1 accordingly stands
rejected.
Reply be filed within a period of six weeks and
matter be listed for hearing after reply of the respondents
are received."
3. It is evident from the order dated 27.09.2021 that before filing of the
writ petition, the orders impugned were implemented. This Court, in a
matter of present nature, would not pass an order of status quo ante.
4. Even the appeal is preferred only on 27.04.2022, i.e. after more
than 06 months from the rejection of the interim prayer.
5. In that view of the matter, we see no good ground to interfere with
the order of the learned Single Judge, and accordingly, the writ appeal
stands dismissed.
6. It is, however, noticed that the learned Single Judge had directed to
file reply within a period of six weeks and the matter was to be listed for
hearing thereafter.
7. Mr. C. Jayant K. Rao submits that till today, the writ petition has not
been listed before the learned Single Judge.
8. We, accordingly, direct the Registry to list the case on 11.05.2022
before the learned Single Judge having roster.
Sd/- Sd/-
(Arup Kumar Goswami) (Rajendra Chandra Singh Samant)
Chief Justice Judge
Brijmohan
