SANJAY KUMAR PRADHAN Vs. STATE OF CHHATTISGARH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Challenge in this petition is to the order dated 10.09.2013 whereby the order of appointment issued in favour of the petitioner on 11.08.2011 has been cancelled.

(2.) The brief facts of the case is that, the respondents had issued an advertisement on 28.02.2011 (Annexure P/3) whereby the applications were invited from the eligible candidates for filling up different posts advertised. Applications were also invited for one post of Shiksha Karmi Grade-I (Hindi) along with other posts. After the recruitment process was complete, the respondents admittedly found the present petitioner to be the most meritorious candidate for the said post of Shiksha Karmi-Grade- I and on the basis of which an order of appointment was issued in favour of the petitioner on 11.08.2011.

(3.) The complication arose when against the said one post of Shiksha Karmi Grade-I which was advertised, the respondent-Chief Executive Officer, Nagar Panchayat, Tundra, in addition to issuance of an order of appointment in favour of the petitioner being most meritorious candidate, has also issued an order of appointment in favour of one Parmeshwar Lal. It appears that some complaint was lodged against the said recruitment process, therefore an inquiry was ordered to be conducted. The inquiry was conducted by the three Joint Directors under the Local Administration and Development Department. The inquiry team submitted their report vide Ex.P/8. In the said inquiry, the only defect pointed out was that though an advertisement was published for filling up only one post of Shiksha Karmi Grade-I (Hindi), the respondents have appointed two persons against one post advertised. The fact is that along with the petitioner, order of appointment was also issued in favour of one Parmeshwar Lal. Since the said Parmeshwar Lal did not assume his duties, order of appointment was issued in favour of one Sarita Patel by the Chief Executive Officer, Nagar Panchayat, Tundra.