Chattisgarh High Court
Birendra Kumar Korram vs State Of Chhattisgarh on 10 October, 2022
1
NAFR
HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR
WPS No. 6262 of 2022
• Birendra Kumar Korram S/o Late Harilal Korram, Aged About
37 Years R/o Makdi Singrai, Police Station Kanker, District
North Baster Kanker Chhattisgarh.
---- Petitioner
Versus
1. State of Chhattisgarh Through the Secretary, Public Health
Engineering Department, Mahanadi Bhawan, Mantralaya,
Nawa Raipur Chhattisgarh.
2. The Superintending Engineer, Public Health Engineering
Department, Durg Division, Durg Chhattisgarh.
3. The Executive Engineer, Public Health Engineering, Balod
Division, District : Balod, Chhattisgarh
4. The Deputy Inspector General Of Police (Secret
Conversation) Special Branch, Police Headquarter, Ground
Floor, Block No. 1, Atal Nagar, Raipur Chhattisgarh.
5. The Superintendent Of Police, Kanker, District - North Bastar
Kanker Chhattisgarh.
---- Respondents
For Petitioner : Mr. Gautam Khetrapal, Advocate
For Respondents : Mr. S. Dubey, Dy. Advocate General.
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Parth Prateem Sahu
Order On Board
10/10/2022
1. Learned counsel for petitioner would submit that vide order
dated 14.12.2020 petitioner was given compassionate
appointment on the post of Helper. However, upon receipt of
police verification report from respondent No.4, it revealed that
petitioner had suppressed the information regarding his
involvement in a criminal case. On the basis of reply
submitted by petitioner stating that he has already been
acquitted vide judgment dated 2.2.2005, respondent No.4 was
requested to send fresh verification report. When respondent
No.4 did not submit fresh verification report for sufficient long
time, petitioner approached the High Court by filing writ
petition bearing WPS No.4143/2022 for a direction to
respondent No.4 to submit verification report in view of
changed circumstances. Said writ petition came to be
disposed of vide order dated 22.6.2022 directing respondent
No.4 & 5 therein to send fresh verification report within sixty
days. Respondent No.3 sent letter dated 16.8.2022
(Annexure P-1) to respondent No.3 confirming the opinion
given earlier in respect of petitioner that he is found unfit for
government service. He contended that opinion of respondent
No.4 contained in Annexure P-1 is not correct in view of
decision of Hon'ble Supreme Court in cases of Avtar Singh v.
Union of India, reported in (2016) 8 SCC 471; Mohd. Imran v.
State of Maharashtra reported in (2019) 17 SCC 696; and
Satish Chandra Yadav v. Union of India, reported in 2022 SCC
Online SC 1300.
2. Learned State Counsel would submit that respondent authority
has yet not taken any decision on verification report submitted
by respondent No.4, therefore, this writ petition is pre-mature.
3. At this stage, learned counsel for petitioner would submit that
petitioner may be permitted to withdraw this writ petition with
liberty to submit detailed representation before respondent
No.2 & 3.
4. Taking into consideration facts and circumstances of case,
submission of learned for petitioner that petitioner is not
pressing this writ petition on merits and praying for liberty to
approach respondent No.2 & 3 by making representation on
verification report (Annexure P-1), the petitioner is permitted to
withdraw this petition.
5. Consequently, the writ petition stands dismissed as withdrawn.
Petitioner is granted liberty to submit representation before
respondent No.2 & 3 pursuant to verification report (Annexure
P-1). On making such representation within two weeks from
today, respondent No.2 shall consider the same on its own
merits in accordance with law.
6. Certified copy as per rules.
Sd/-
(Parth Prateem Sahu)
Judge
roshan/-
