S.C. Sharma And ORS. v. State Of Chhattisgarh And ORS.

NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR WPS No.7221 of 2009

1. S. C. Sharma, S/o Shri Guman Prasad Sharma, aged about 54 years, R/o Sarkanda, Seepat Road, Bilaspur (C.G.) working as Steno Typist, Office of Divisional Forest Officer, Forest Division Bilaspur, Sindhi Colony Road, District Bilaspur (C.G.)

2. P. L. Kachhi, S/o Late Shri Rameshwar Prasad Kachhi, aged about 59 years, R/o Sarkanda, Seepat Road, Bilaspur (C.G.) working as Steno Typist, Office of Divisional Forest Officer, Forest Division, Marwahi, Head Quarter Pendra Road, District Bilaspur (C.G.)

3. Sampat Ram Toppo, S/o Shri Mahaveer Prasad, aged about 43 years, R/o F-3, Forest Colony, Kasabadi, Korba, working as Steno Typist, Office of Divisional Forest Officer, Division Korba, District Korba (C.G.) ---- Petitioners

Versus

1. State of Chhattisgarh through the Secretary, Department of Forest, Mantralaya, D.K.S.

Bhawan, Raipur (C.G.)

2. Principal Chief Conservator of Forest, Aranya Bhawan, Medical College Road, Raipur (C.G.)

3. Conservator of Forest, Circle Bilaspur, District Bilaspur (C.G.) ---- Respondents For Petitioners Mr. Shantam Awasthi, Adv On behalf of Mr. Mateen Siddiqui, Adv.

For Respondent-State Mr. Sunil Otwani, Addl. AG

Hon'ble Justice Shri Sanjay K. Agrawal Order On Board 10/08/2021 1.

Mr. Shantam Awasthi, learned counsel for the petitioner, would submit that though the petitioners' case for promotion to the post of Stenographer Grade-III was recommended by the respondent No.3 to the respondent No.2 vide memo dated 09.12.2005 (Annexure-P/10), but till date no decision has been taken by the respondent No.2 on the said memo. He would further submit that the petitioner Nos.1 & 2 have already retired from service, therefore, the respondent authorities may be directed to consider the case of the petitioner No.3 for promotion to the post of Stenographer and further to consider the case of the petitioner Nos.1 & 2 for all the consequential service benefits.

2.

Mr. Otwani, learned Addl. Advocate General for the State, would submit that the petitioners' case shall be considered and decided expeditiously keeping in view the memo dated 09.12.2005.

3.

Be that as it may, since the petitioner Nos.1

& 2 have already retired from the service, the respondent No.2 is directed to consider and decide the representation of the petitioner No.3 for promotion to the post of Stenographer and further the case of the petitioner Nos.1 & 2 for all the consequential service benefits be also considered, if not considered, within a period of 60 days from the date of receipt of copy of this order.

4.

With the aforesaid observation and direction, the writ petition stands disposed of. No order as to cost (s).

Sd/- Sanjay K. Agrawal Judge Nirala