Skip to content
Order
  • Library
  • Features
  • About
  • Blog
  • Contact
Get started
Book a Demo

Order

At Order.law, we’re building India’s leading AI-powered legal research platform.Designed for solo lawyers, law firms, and corporate legal teams, Order helps you find relevant case law, analyze judgments, and draft with confidence faster and smarter.

Product

  • Features
  • Blog

Company

  • About
  • Contact

Legal

  • Privacy
  • Terms

Library

  • Acts
  • Judgments
© 2025 Order. All rights reserved.
  1. Home/
  2. Library/
  3. High Court Of Chhattisgarh/
  4. 2024/
  5. May

Manish G. Yadav vs. State of Chhattisgarh

Decided on 31 May 2024• Citation: WPS/2890/2024• High Court of Chhattisgarh
Download PDF

Read Judgment


                                       Page No.1 of 3                               
                                            IN                                      
                             Writ Petition ( Service ) No. 2890 of 20 24            
                                                                      NAFR          
                       HIGH  COURT  OF  CHHATTISGARH,    BILASPUR                   
                          Writ Petition ( Service ) No. 2890 of 20 24               
               Manish  G. Yadav, S/o  Dr. D.G. Yadav, aged  about 41  years,        
               Occupation- Teacher, L.B. Government   Middle School, Purani         
               Basti Korba, District Korba (C.G.)                                   
                                                              ---- Petitioner       
                                          Versus                                    
               1.   State of Chhattisgarh, Through The Secretary, Education         
                    Department,  Indravati Bhavan, Atal Nagar, Nava Raipur,         
                    District Raipur (C.G.)                                          
               2.   Director, Public Instruction Directorate Indravati Bhawan,      
                    Atal Nagar, Nava Raipur, District Raipur (C.G.)                 
               3.   Joint Director, Education Department,  Bilaspur, District       
                    Bilaspur (C.G.)                                                 
               4.   District Education Officer, Korba, District Korba (C.G.)        
               5.   District Coordinator, Samagra  Shiksha  Korba,  District        
                    Korba (C.G.)                                                    
               6.   Block Education Officer Korba, District Korba (C.G.)            
               7.   Bipin Yadav, Teahcer (L.B.) Middle School, Ratakhar, Block      
                    Korba, District Korba (C.G.)                                    
                                                           ---- Respondents         
                      (Cause-title taken from Case Information System)              
               For Petitioner          :    Mr. Awadh  Tripathi, Advocate           
               For Respondents/State   :    Mr. Rahul Tamaskar, Govt. Adv.          
                  Single Bench: Hon'ble Shri Justice Sachin Singh Rajput            
                                     (Order on Board)                               
               31 . 05 .202 4                                                       
              1.    Challenge in this petition is to an order dated 08.02.2024      
               (Annexure-P/01), by  which,  as an  adhoc  arrangement,  the         
               respondent  No.07  herein, under the  anticipation of regular        
               appointment, has been given the charge of Cluster Coordinator in     
               Cluster Center, Korba.                                               

                                       Page No.2 of 3                               
                                            IN                                      
                             Writ Petition ( Service ) No. 2890 of 20 24            
              2.    Mr. Awadh   Tripathi, learned counsel appearing for the         
               petitioner submits that vide order dated 22.01.2022 (Annexure-       
               P/02), the petitioner was appointed as Cluster Coordinator at        
               Korba. Thereafter, the petitioner was subsequently suspended         
               and, therefore, the impugned order (Annexure-P/01) was passed        
               as an adhoc arrangement. However,  later on, the suspension of       
               the petitioner was revoked on 09.05.2024 (Annexure-P/07), but        
               still he is deprived from  performing  his work   as Cluster         
               Coordinator. Learned counsel further submits that for redressal      
               of his grievance, the petitioner has preferred representations       
               dated    17.05.2024     (Annexure-P/8)    and     22.05.2024         
               (Annexure-P/09), but both went  in vain. Learned counsel also        
               submits  that the appointment  order of the  petitioner dated        
               22.01.2022 (Annexure-P/02)  is still in existence, therefore, the    
               impugned  order dated 08.02.2024 (Annexure-P/01) is liable to be     
               set aside.                                                           
              3.    On  the other hand, Mr.  Rahul Tamaskar,  learned State         
               counsel opposes the submissions made  by the learned counsel         
               for the petitioner and submits that the petitioner has no absolute   
               right to be appointed on the post of Cluster Coordinator. He         
               further submits  that  the  petitioner has already  preferred        
               representations before the concerned authorities, which he may       
               purse for redressal of his grievance.                                

                                       Page No.3 of 3                               
                                            IN                                      
                             Writ Petition ( Service ) No. 2890 of 20 24            
              4.    Be that as it may, this Court is of the opinion that as the     
               petitioner was  earlier suspended  and  his suspension   was         
               revoked, but he  has made   representations dated 17.05.2024         
               (Annexure-P/8) and 22.05.2024  (Annexure-P/09) ventilating his       
               grievance to appoint him on the post of Cluster Coordinator in       
               compliance  of order dated  22.01.2022  (Annexure-P/02), the         
               respondent No.05  herein is hereby  directed to consider and         
               decide the said representations of the petitioner preferably within  
               a period of six weeks from the date of production of copy of this    
               order. The petitioner is also at liberty to submit any additional    
               representation ventilating his grievance. It is expected that        
               respondents-authorities, particularly respondent No.05, shall        
               pass speaking  order considering the grievance raised by the         
               petitioner in accordance with law.                                   
              5.    With  aforesaid observation and  direction and  without         
               expressing any  opinion on the merits  of the case, this writ        
               petition stands disposed of.                                         
              6.    In view of the above, all pending interlocutory applications    
               are also disposed of.                                                
                                                     Sd/-                           
                                             (Sachin Singh Rajput)                  
                                                    Judge                           
        s@if