Adarsh Sao v. Managing Director

NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR WPS No. 2308 of 2020 • Adarsh Sao S/o Shri Girija Shankar Sao, Aged About 36 Years Working As Field Officer, And Posted At Zila Antyavasai, Balod, District Balod Chhattisgarh ---- Petitioner

Versus

1. Managing Director Chhattisgarh Rajya Antyavasai Vitta And Vikas Nigam, Fourth Floor, Commercial Bhawan, Housing Board Bhawan, Sector 27, Atal Nagar, Raipur, District Raipur Chhattisgarh

2. Babu Bhai Shrivas, Executive Officer, District Committee Chhattisgarh Rajya Antyavasai Vitta And Vikas Nigam Kondagaon, District Kondagaon Chhattisgarh,

3. Laxmi Prasad Kashyap, Executive Officer, District Committee Chhattisgarh Rajya Antyavasai Vitta And Vikas Nigam Mungeli District Mungeli Chhattisgarh, ---- Respondents For Petitioner :

Mr. Ajay Shrivastava, Advocate Hon'ble Shri Justice Goutam Bhaduri Order 03.07.2020 Heard

1. The limited prayer made by the petitioner in the present petition is that the petitioner was initially appointed on the post of Field Officer and his seniority in the gradation list appears to be at serial No. 15 and respondents no. 2 & 3 (namely, Babu Bhai Shrivas & Laxmi Prasad Kashyap) are junior to the petitioner and their name appears to be at serial no. 18 &19. Learned counsel

for the petitioner submits that during the promotion, respondents No. 2 & 3 were promoted to the post of Executive Officer ignoring th seniority of the petitioner. It is contended that the petitioner had filed representations on 30.03.2019 & 05.09.2019 but none of them has been decided till date. It is further contended that neither any adverse remark exists against the petitioner nor any departmental proceeding is pending against him so there is no reason as to why he has been superseded. In this circumstance, the only prayer made by the petitioner is that his representations collectively filed as Annexure P/4 may be considered and the respondent No. 1 may be given a direction to decide the same.

2. Considering the limited prayer made by the petitioner that only his representation may be considered/ decided, it is directed that the petitioner may file a fresh representation to the respondent No. 1 within a period of three weeks, thereafter, the respondent No. 1 shall decide the same within a period of four months from the date of receipt of such representation. However, it is made clear that this Court has not expressed any opinion on the merits of this case and the respondent No. 1 shall decide the matter, on its own merits, strictly in accordance with law.

3. With the aforesaid directions/ observations, the present writ petition stands disposed off.

Sd/- (Goutam Bhaduri) Judge Vishakha