Rajeshwar Rao Kridat v. State Of Chhattisgarh

NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WRIT PETITION (SERVICE) NO. 986 OF 2021 • Rajeshwar Rao Kridat, S/o Shri Shivshankar Rao Kridat, aged about 55 years, Lecturer (presently working as Assistant Program Coordinator) at District Project Office, Education Department, Balod, District Balod (CG) ... Petitioner versus 1.

State of Chhattisgarh, through Secretary, Department of Education, Mahanadi Bhawan, Mantralaya, Atal Nagar, New Raipur, District Raipur (CG) 2.

Director, Public Instructions, Chhattisgarh, Raipur, District Raipur (CG) 3.

Joint Director, Education Department, near Multipurpose School,Durg (CG) 4.

District Education Officer, Balod, District Balod (CG) ... Respondents For Petitioner :

Mr. Ajay Shrivastava, Advocate.

For Respondents/State :

Mr. V.R. Tiwari, Addl. A.G.

Hon'ble Shri Justice P. Sam Koshy Order on Board /03/2021 1.

The defaults pointed out by the Registry of this Court in the instant case stand ignored as of now.

2.

With the consent of learned Counsels appearing for the parties, heard the matter finally at admission stage itself.

3.

Grievance of Petitioner seems to be the non-consideration of Petitioner for promotion at par with the similarly situated persons and persons junior to him on the post of Lecturer.

4.

It is a case where the Petitioner was granted promotion on the post of Upper Division Teacher but he was not given proper seniority. He agitated his grievance before the Department and after scrutiny the Department has considered his grievance and found that to be justified and thereby his seniority has been rectified. In the course of rectification of his seniority, the persons similarly situated as also junior to Petitioner have further been reflected as Lecturers and the Petitioner also is entitled for being promoted to the post of Lecturer at par with other similarly placed and immediate juniors to him. Though the Petitioner has been granted promotion on the post of Lecturer at later stage, he is claiming seniority from the date the other similarly placed and immediate juniors to him have been granted promotion on the post of Lecturer. In this regard, the representation of Petitioner is already pending before Respondents No. 2 to 4.

5.

Learned Additional Advocate General submits that since the representation of Petitioner is already pending consideration before Respondents No. 2 to 4, the same shall be considered by the authorities on due verification of the factual matrix of the case.

6.

Given the said submission, the Respondents No. 2 to 4 are directed to consider and decide the representation of Petitioner so far as promotion from the date on which similarly placed persons and juniors to Petitioner have been granted promotion on the post of Lecturer, at the earliest, preferably within a period of 90 days from the date of receipt of copy of this order. 7.

With the aforesaid direction, the Writ Petition stands disposed of. Sd/- (P. Sam Koshy) /sharad/ JUDGE