WPSS/1990/2023
2023 Latest Caselaw 3347 UK

             Office Notes, reports,
             orders or proceedings
SL.
      Date     or directions and                       COURT'S OR JUDGES'S ORDERS
No
             Registrar's order with
                  Signatures
                                      WPSS No.1990 of 2023
                                      Hon'ble Pankaj Purohit, J.

Mr. Jitendra Chaudhary, learned counsel for the petitioner.

2. Mr. Narayan Dutt, learned Standing Counsel for the State.

3. Heard learned counsel for the parties.

4. Petitioner has sought the indulgence of this Court by directing respondents to take decision upon the representation dated 21.01.2023, annexure-1 to the writ petition, moved by the petitioner for re-engagement with the respondent-department as Junior Engineer on daily wages basis in the light of the recommendation dated 25.01.2023 made by respondent no.3 i.e. Block Development Officer/Programme Officer Block and Tehsil Jaspur, District Udham Singh Nagar.

5. It is the case of the petitioner that petitioner was initially engaged as Junior Engineer as daily wager under the MGNREGA Scheme with the respondent- department. Sometimes in the year 2019, a first information report was lodged against the petitioner along with two other persons. The said FIR was challenged by the petitioner moving this Court by filing criminal writ petition and in that writ petition, arrest of the petitioner was stayed. Though, after filing the charge-sheet, writ petition was dismissed as infructuous. Thereafter, petitioner along with two co-accused persons challenged the charge-sheet by filing C482 Application No.400 of 2023, which was allowed on the basis of compounding application, charge-sheet was quashed vide judgment and order dated 17.03.2023 and consequently, the entire criminal proceedings intitated pursuant to the aforesaid FIR has come to an end.

6. After the criminal prosecution launched against the petitioner came to an end, petitioner made a representation to the Block Devlopment Officer, Tehsil Jaspur, District Udham Singh Nagar, who has recommended that petitioner can be taken back in service in view of the entire criminal proceedings initiated against him were quashed. The representation dated 21.01.2023, annexure-1 to the writ petition, submitted by petitioner was forwarded by respondent no.3 to respondent no.2, who is the authority to take decision upon the aforesaid representation. But, no action has been taken by the respondent no.2 regarding the reinstatement of the petitioner back to service as daily wager as Junior Engineer under MGNREGA Scheme with the respondent-department.

7. An innocuous prayer has been made by learned counsel for the petitioner that respondent no.2 may be directed to take a decision on the representation, so submitted, by the petitioner within a stipulated time.

8. Learned State Counsel has no objection to this proposition offered by learned counsel for the petitioner.

9. Having heard the learned counsel for the parties, the writ petition is being disposed off finally with a direction to the respondent no.2 to decide the representation of the petitioner dated 21.01.2023, annexure-1 to the writ petition within a period of six weeks from the date of production of a certified copy of this order, particularly, in the light of the recommendation dated 25.01.2023 made by respondent no.3.

(Pankaj Purohit, J.) 06.11.2023 AK