Gopi Ram Jataw And ANR. v. State Of Chhattisgarh And ORS.

NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR WPS No. 2031 of 2015

1. Gopi Ram Jataw S/o Kisundayl Jataw Aged About 52 years Working As Head Master At Middle School Darra (K), Police Station - Kasdol, District- Baloda Bazar, Bhatapara (Chhattisgarh).

2. Bharat Lal Ratre S/o S/o Thukel Prasad Aged About 49 Years Working As Head Master At Middle School Baldakachhar, Police StationKasdol, District- Baloda Bazar, Bhatapara (Chhattisgarh). ---- Petitioners

Versus

1. State Of Chhattisgarh Through Secretary Of Education Department Mantralaya Capital Complex, Mahanadi Bhawan Naya Raipur, DistrictRaipur (Chhattisgarh)

2. Director, Public Education Directorate Chhattisgarh, Naya Raipur, District- Raipur (Chhattisgarh)

3. Umedra Singh Verma Working As Upper Division Teacher At Middle School Soniyadih Police Station- Baloda Bazar, District- Baloda Bazar, Bhatapara (Chhattisgarh).

4. Hira Lal Yadav Working As Upper Division Teacher At Middle School Kosmanda Police Station - Baloda Bazar, District- Baloda Bazar, Bhatapara (Chhattisgarh).

---- Respondents For Petitioner Shri Vikas Pandey, Advocate For Respondent/State Shri S. Mazid Ali, PL Hon'ble Shri Justice Prashant Kumar Mishra Order On Board By 13/07/2015 1.

The petitioners are working as Head Master, they are aggrieved by their supersession in the matter of promotion to the post of Lecturer (Geography).

2.

According to learned counsel for the petitioners, number of juniors have been promoted and despite representation being filed by the petitioners, their grievance has not been paid heed to. He would submit that the petitioners have not earned any adverse remark, nor any enquiry is pending against them, therefore, non-consideration of their case for promotion is arbitrary.

3.

Learned counsel would further submit that for the present, the petitioners may be permitted to make fresh representation and the respondents be directed to decide the same at the earliest, so that the petitioners are aware as to the reason for denial of promotion. 4.

Learned State counsel would submit that if fresh representation is filed, the same shall be considered and decided, in accordance with law. 5.

In view of the foregoing, the writ petition is disposed of with a direction that in the event, the petitioners submit fresh representation within a period of one month from today, the competent authority shall consider and decide the same by a speaking order, in accordance with law, on its own merits, within a further period of three months. 6.

It is made clear that this Court has not expressed any opinion on the merits of the case and the respondent authorities shall decide the matter, on its own merits, strictly in accordance with law, without treating any observation made in this order, as opinion on the merits of the case Sd/- JUDGE PRASHANT KUMAR MISHRA Nirala