Nafr High Court
Case Details
1 AMARDEEP CHOUBEY Digitally signed by AMARDEEP CHOUBEY Date: 2025.03.22 16:29:16 +0530 2025:CGHC:13295 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPS No. 5139 of 2024 1 - Indradeo Singh S/o Late Suraj Singh Aged About 60 Years Working As Assistant Veterinary Field Officer, Posted At District Verinary Hospital Ambikapur, District Sarguja, C.G. ... Petitioner(s) versus 1 - State of Chhattisgarh Through Secretary, Department Of Livestock Development, Mantralaya, Mahanadi Bhawan, New Raipur, Atal Nagar, Distt. Raipur, C.G. 2 - Director Veterinary Services, Ground Floor, Block No. 03, Indrawati Bhawan, Atal Nagar, Distt. Raipur, C.G. 3 - Deputy Director Veterinary Services, Ambikapur, District Sarguja, C.G. ... Respondent(s) For Petitioner(s)
Legal Reasoning
: Mr. Anand Shukla, Advocate. For Respondent/State : Mr. Sabhyasachi Choubey, Panel Lawyer. Hon’ble Shri Bibhu Datta Guru, Judge 20/03/2025 Order on Board 2 1. By the present writ petition, the petitioner, who is a sexagenarian, is seeking for the following reliefs:- “1. the Hon'ble Court may be kind be pleased to quash or set aside the order dated 25.04.2024 (P/1) issued by the Respondent No. 03/Deputy Director, Veterinary Services, Ambikapur. 2. the Hon'ble Court may be kindly be pleased to direct the respondent authorities to count the period from 01.01.1999 to 14.05.2007 as service period and 3. the Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to direct the respondent authorities for fixation of salary and grant of arrears of salary along with all consequential benefits accordingly. 4. the Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to direct the respondent No.03 to consider the period of 01.01.1999 to 14.05.2007 as service period of the petitioner and communicate the same to Joint Director, Treasury and Accounts Department, Ambikapur. 5. Any other relief/reliefs which Hon’ble Court may deem fit in the facts and circumstances of the instant case.” 3
Decision
2. (A) Case of the petitioner, as projected in the writ petition is that the petitioner appointed as Poultry Vaccinator in the Department of the Veterinary Services in the year 1994. Subsequently, he selected for the post of Assistant Veterinary Field Officer, however, he has been reverted to the post of Poultry Vaccinator on the ground of lack of requisite qualification i.e. 10+2, which is required for the said post. When the petitioner went to join the authorities, they have not accepted the joining of the petitioner on the post of Poultry Vaccinator on the ground that the said post has been declared as dying cadre. (B) Being aggrieved, the petitioner approached the State Administrative Tribunal wherein by order dated 01/03/1999, it has been directed that the petitioner be permitted to join on the post of Poultry Vaccinator. When the petitioner went to join, they have not allowed the petitioner. In the meanwhile, on account of abolition of the Tribunal, the matter was transferred to the High Court wherein it has been renumbered as WPS No.1779/2005 which was allowed vide order dated 04/05/2007. Against the said order, the State preferred the writ appeal which was disposed of vide order dated 12/04/2010. Against the said order, the petitioner approached the Hon’ble Supreme Court by filing SLP which was dismissed. Even the review 4 petition has also been dismissed by the Hon’ble Supreme Court. (C) On 02/11/2010, the petitioner service has been reverted to the post of Poultry Vaccinator and accordingly he joined on 21/03/2011. Thereafter, with due permission of the authorities, the petitioner cleared 10+2 examination and accordingly he obtained the requisite qualification for the post of Assistant Veterinary Field Officer. However, when he has not been sent for training to the post of Assistant Veterinary Field Officer, he preferred WPS No.912/2013. Pursuant to the order of this Court, the petitioner was sent for training for the said post. Thereafter, the petitioner was promoted to the post of Assistant Veterinary Field Officer on 06/10/2018. When the matter was placed for fixation of pay scale, the concerned Treasury authorities raised objection about the duty period of the petitioner from 01/01/1999 to 14/05/2007. Based on the same, the respondent No.3 asked the petitioner to provide the documents with regard to his absent period, to which, the petitioner submitted a detailed representation, however, without considering the representation of the petitioner, the order impugned has been passed and directed the petitioner to submit the suitable application for leave from 01/01/1999 to 14/05/2007. 5 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the impugned order has been passed in an illegal and arbitrary manner and only to harass the petitioner. Pursuant to the order of the Tribunal when the petitioner went to join the service, the authorities have not accepted the joining of the petitioner. He would submit that the impugned action on the part of the respondent authorities is contrary to the well settled principles of law. The petitioner never remained absent from service unauthorisely. 4. Learned counsel appearing for the State, per contra, would submit that the petitioner has not made any effort to join the service for a period of about eight years and for the first time, he had moved the application on 11/03/2024 for grant of salary in respect of the aforesaid period that too without any documents. Thus the petitioner is not entitled for any relief. 5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties, perused the pleadings and documents. 6. It is an admitted position that when the petitioner was not permitted to join the post of Poultry Vaccinator, he approached the Tribunal wherein the Tribunal permitted to join on the post of Poultry Vaccinator, to which, he has been reverted. When the petitioner went to the authorities, they declined to give joining to the petitioner. Thereafter, the matter travelled up to the Supreme Court and then only he has been permitted to join 6 on the post of Poultry Vaccinator and subsequently he has acquired the requisite qualification for the post of Assistant Veterinary Field Officer. Even for the training also, the petitioner has been compelled to approach this Court and only after intervention of the Court, the petitioner was sent on training and thereafter, he has promoted on the post of Assistant Veterinary Field Officer. From all these facts, it is crystal clear that the respondent authorities are acting in a malafide manner only to harass an employee since last more than three decades. 7. In view of the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case, the impugned order dated 25/04/2024 is quashed; count the period from 01/01/1999 to 14/05/2007 as service period; accordingly, respondent authorities are directed to fix the pay scale of the petitioner, as per his entitlement; and release all the dues along with consequential benefit to the petitioner within a period of ninety days from the date of receipt of the copy of this order. 8. In the result, the writ petition is allowed. SD/- (Bibhu Datta Guru) Judge Gowri/ Amardeep