IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
W. P (S) No. 1983 of 2009
With
I. A. No. 819 of 2011
Md. Jabbar ..... Petitioner
Versus
Central Coalfield Limited, through its Chairman-cum-Managing Director, Ranchi &
Others ..... Respondents
-----
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE NARENDRA NATH TIWARI
-----
For the Petitioner - Mrs. M.M.Pal, Sr. Adv.
For the Respondents - Mrs. Banani Verma
-----
5/28.6.2011
This case has been listed under the heading “For Orders” on I. A. No.
819/2011.
When the said interlocutory application is called out, learned counsel for the
parties submitted that the writ petition itself may be taken up today, as a very short
point is involved In this case.
On the joint prayer of the parties, this writ petition is being taken up for hearing
along with the said interlocutory application.
In the interlocutory application, the petitioner has prayed for fixing an early date
of hearing of the case. Since the writ petition is being taken up for disposal today itself,
no separate order is required to be passed in the interlocutory application.
In this writ petition, the petitioner has prayed for quashing the order of dismissal
dated 11.2.09 passed by the Project Officer, Sirka Colliery and also for other
consequential reliefs. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that while passing
the impugned order, the Project Officer has committed errors of facts and law and the
impugned order is improper, invalid and unsustainable.
Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respondents-C.C.L submitted that
there is provision for appeal against the impugned order of the appointing authority
and the petitioner has availed the said opportunity by preferring appeal before the
Director, Personnel, C.C.L. The petitioner’s appeal is still under consideration and the
appellate authority has not applied his mind. In view thereof, this writ petition is
premature and is liable to be dismissed in limine.
Learned counsel for the petitioner has not disputed the contention of learned
counsel for the respondents that there is provision for appeal against the impugned
order. He has also admitted that the appeal has been preferred by the petitioner.
However, learned counsel submitted that the appeal was filed long ago in the year
16.2.09, but till date the same has not been considered and disposed of by the
appellate authority. The petitioner, under that compelling circumstance, has
approached this Court.
Having heard learned counsel, this writ petition is disposed of directing the
appellate authority – Director, Personnel, C.C.L, Ranchi to dispose of the petitioner’s
appeal within a period of three months from the date of receipt / production of a copy
of this order.
This writ petition as well as I. A. No. 819/2011 stand disposed of.
S.K (NARENDRA NATH TIWARI, J)