Ajay Kumar Sahu v. State Of Chhattisgarh And Another

NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPS No. 1740 of 2009 Ajay Kumar Sahu, Aged about 47 years, S/o Shri S.L. Sahu, Presently Posted as Executive Engineer, P.H.E. Division Korba R/o F/4, Civil Lines, Korba, Chhattisgarh.

---Petitioner

Versus

1. State of Chhattisgarh, Through Principal Secretary Public Health Engineering Department, Mantralaya, D.K.S. Bhawan, Raipur, Chhattisgarh.

2. Secretary, Chhattisgarh Public Service Commission Mantralaya, D.K.S. Bhawan, Raipur, Chhattisgarh. --- Respondents For Petitioner :- Mr. Aniket Verma, Advocate For Respondent 1/State :- Mr. Ravi Bhagat, Dy. G.A.

For Respondent 2 :- Mr. Anuroop Panda, Advocate Hon'ble Shri Justice Sanjay K. Agrawal Order on Board (Through Video Conferencing) 29/06/2021

1. The short grievance raised in this writ petition is that though the petitioner is entitled to be promoted with effect from 05/07/2003, but he has been promoted on the post of Executive Engineer

with effect from 27/10/2005 for which he has already made a representation on 06/10/2008 (Annexure P/8), but it has yet not been considered and decided.

2. Mr. Aniket Verma, learned counsel for the petitioner, would submit that though petitioner is entitled to be promoted on the post of Executive Engineer from 05/07/2003, the date on which his two seniors namely Shri Maganlal Agarwal and Shri J.K. Sharma were promoted from the post of Executive Engineer to Superintendent Engineer, whereas the petitioner has been promoted from 27/10/2005 which is ex-facie illegal and bad in law and he has also made a representation in this regard (Annexure P/8) but that has yet not been decided.

3. Mr. Ravi Bhagat, learned State counsel, would submit that the competent authority would do well to consider and decide petitioner's representation.

4. I have heard learned counsel for the parties at length.

5. Be that as it may, since petitioner has already made a representation for his promotion on the post of Executive Engineer with effect from 05/07/2003, State is directed to consider and decide his

representation within 60 days from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. Petitioner is at liberty to make additional submission and file documents in support of his representation. It is made clear that this Court has not expressed any opinion of the merits of the matter.

6. Accordingly, this writ petition stands disposed of. No cost(s).

Sd/- (Sanjay K. Agrawal) Judge Harneet