Smt. Prema Rajesh Manjhi v. State Of Chhattisgarh

-1NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPS No. 73 of 2019 Smt. Prema Rajesh Manjhi W/o Shri Ram Narayan Manjhi Aged About 42 Years Presently Posted As Patwari, R/o Ward No. 3, Sheorinarayan, District- JanjgirChampa, Chhattisgarh. ---- Petitioner

Versus

1. State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Secretary, Department Of Revenue, D.K.S. Bhawan, Raipur, Chhattisgarh.

2. The Commissioner Land Record Chhattisgarh Atal Nagar, Indravati Bhawan, First Floor, Block-2, Raipur, District- Raipur, Chhattisgarh.

3. The Collector Janjgir-Champa, District- Janjgir-Champa, Chhattisgarh.

4. Amit Kumar Posted As Revenue Inspector, Through The Collector (Land Record Branch), District- Dantewada, Chhattisgarh.

5. Nandkishore Singh Posted As Revenue Inspector, Through The Collector (Land Record Branch) District- Koriya, Chhattisgarh.

6. Sunil Kumar Ingole Posted As Revenue Inspector, Through The Collector (Land Record Branch), District- Mahasamund, Chhattisgarh.

7. Smt. Shweta Sharma Posted As Revenue Inspector, Through The Collector (Land Record Branch), District- Bemetara, Chhattisgarh.

8. Smt. Lalita Sidar Posted As Revenue Inspector, Through The Collector (Land Record Branch), District : Raigarh, Chhattisgarh ---Respondents For Petitioner :

Mr. Goutam Khetrapal, Advocate For State :

Mr. Saleem Kazi, Dy. A.G.

Hon'ble Shri Justice P. Sam Koshy Order on Board 09/01/2019

1. The grievance of the petitioner in the present writ petition is that she had participated in the selection process for promotion to the post of Revenue Inspector. The petitioner along with the private respondents No. 4 to 8 were working on the post of Patwari.

2. According to the petitioner, when the results were published, though the petitioner has scored more marks than the private respondents, she has not been found eligible for promotion and the private respondents inspite of scoring marks less than the petitioner, have been considered for promotion.

-23. The counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has scored 265 marks in the selection process, whereas the respondents No. 4 to 8 have scored less than the petitioner, yet they have been granted promotion.

4. According to the petitioner, there are large number of vacancies still available and the authorities concerned can still consider the case of the petitioner on due verification, so far as the merits of the petitioner's claim is concerned, and therefore prays for a suitable direction to the respondents in this regard.

5. Perusal of the record would show that the petitioner has not made any representation in this regard to the authorities/higher authorities in the department and has straight away filed the present writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India.

6. Given the facts that the petitioner has not approached the authorities in the department, this Court is of the opinion that ends of justice would serve if the writ petition is disposed of with a direction to the petitioner to immediately file an objection/representation in respect of her claim and grievances to the respondents No.1 & 2, who in turn shall scrutinize the claim of the petitioner objectively and also by verifying the records and thereafter an appropriate decision be taken in accordance with the Rules and Regulations, as also the merits of the petitioner's claim at the earliest preferably within a period of 90 days from the date of receipt of the copy of this order.

7. It shall be the responsibility of the petitioner to appraise the respondents No.1 & 2, so far as the order passed by this Court is concerned.

8. With the aforesaid observations, the writ petition stands disposed off. Sd/- (P. Sam Koshy) Judge Ved