Smt. Shitam Dhruw v. State Of Chhattisgarh

NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR WPS No. 6841 of 2017 • Smt. Shitam Dhruw W/o Shri Ravishankar Dhruw, Aged About 34 Years Constable, District Crime Branch, Narayanpur, Post, Thana & District Narayanpur, Chhattisgarh ---- Petitioner

Versus

1. State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Secretary, Department Of Home, Mahanadi Bhawan, New Raipur, Chhattisgarh

2. Director General Of Police, Police Head Quarter, New Raipur, Chhattisgarh

3. The Superintendent Of Police, Narayanpur, District Narayanpur, Chhattisgarh ---- Respondent For Petitioner Shri Somkant Verma, Advocate.

For Respondents/State Shri Adhiraj Surana, Dy. G.A.

Hon'ble Shri Justice Prashant Kumar Mishra Order On Board 07/12/2017

1. Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that while working as Constable the petitioner was included in the fit case for promotion on the post of Head Constable which was made subject to completion of the P.P. Course. At that time, the petitioner could not undertake the P.P. Course for personal reasons, however, on 21.07.2016, the petitioner was relieved to join the P.P. Course which she successfully completed as is mentioned in the order issued by the Police Training School, Rajnandgaon on 22.11.2016 (Annexure P-

5).

2. The grievance raised in this petition is that several Constables who had cleared the P.P. Course either before or along with the petitioner have been promoted to the post of Head Constable on 06.01.2017 (Annexure P-6), but probably by inadvertence petitioner's name has not been included in the said promotion list.

3. Shri Somkant Verma, learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that for the present, the petitioner may be promoted to make a fresh representation before the competent authority with a direction to the said authority to decide the representation in an objective manner.

4. Considering the entire facts situation of the case, this writ petition is disposed of with a direction that in the event, petitioner prefers fresh representation before the competent authority within 3 weeks from today, the said authority shall consider and decide the petitioner's representation objectively, by speaking order, at the earliest, preferably within a period of 6 weeks from the date of submission of representation.

5. The writ petition is accordingly disposed of.

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 Akhilesh