Suryakant Sonwani v. State Of Chhattisgarh
-1NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR Writ Petition (S) No. 1113 of 2021
1. Suryakant Sonwani S/o Mr. Sadaram Sonwani Aged About 30 Years By Occupation Data Entry Operator, Posted At District Education Officer, Kanker, Tahsil- Kanker, District- Uttar Baster Kanker, Chhattisgarh. ---Petitioner(s)
Versus
1. State of Chhattisgarh Through The Secretary, School Education Department, Mahanadi Bhawan, Mantralay, Atal Nagar, District- Raipur, Chhattisgarh.
2. Director Directorate Of Public Education, Atal Nagar, Indrawati Bhawan, New Raipur, District- Raipur, Chhattisgarh.
3. District Education Officer District Uttar Baster Kanker, Chhattisgarh. ---Respondents For Petitioner :
Shri Parag Kotecha, Advocate.
For Respondent State :
Ms. Akanksha Jain, Dy. Govt. Advocate.
Hon'ble Shri Justice P. Sam Koshy Order on Board 09.06.2021
1. The limited grievance that the petitioner has made through the present writ petition is for an appropriate direction to the respondents to consider and decide the representation which the petitioner has made seeking promotion to the post of MIS Administrator for which the petitioner is fully eligible, competent, qualified and also fulfills all the requisite requirements under the rules.
2. According to learned counsel for the petitioner, large number of posts are lying vacant and inter department correspondence have been made in respect of filling up of the promotional post, however, till date there has been no further development. He further submits that the respondents should consider filling up of the post by way of promotion at regular interval atleast once an year which is also mandate under the Chhattisgarh School Education (Gazetted) Service Rules, 2009.
-23. At this juncture, the State counsel submits that since the representation of the petitioner is already pending consideration, the writ petition may be disposed of at this juncture directing the respondent No.2 to take appropriate decision on the said representation
4. Given the aforesaid submission, the writ petition stands disposed of and the respondent No.2 is directed to decide the representation of the petitioner at the earliest preferably within a period of 90 days from the date of receipt of copy of this order.
5. The writ petition accordingly stands disposed of. Sd/- (P. Sam Koshy) Judge inder