Amarnath Jain v. Chhattisgarh State Antyavasai Sahakari Vitta Evum Vikas Nigam

-1NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPS No. 2355 of 2021

1. Amarnath Jain S/o Gaya Ram Jain Aged About 51 Years Working As Field Officer / Chief Instructor Corporation Head Office, Raipur Chhattisgarh

2. Jeevanram Khutte S/o Late Nanakiram Khutte Aged About 55 Years Working As Field Officer / Chief Instructor Corporation Head Office, Raipur Chhattisgarh District Raipur

3. Shrikant Jha S/o N. N. Jha Aged About 53 Years Working As Field Officer / Chief Instructor Pendraroad, District Gourela- Pendra- Marwahi Chhattisgarh

4. Shyamal Dash S/o Nani Gopal Dash Aged About 53 Years Working As Field Officer / Chief Instructor Corporation Head Office, Zila Samiti Durg District Durg Chhattisgarh

5. Kamlesh Kumar Dewangan S/o Baliram Dewangan Aged About 52 Years Working As Field Officer / Chief Instructor Corporation Head Office, Zila Samiti, Rajnandgaon Chhattisgarh

6. Om Prakash Sahu S/o Ram Prasad Sahu Aged About 51 Years Working As Field Officer / Chief Instructor Corporation Head Office, Zila Samiti Bilaspur District Bilaspur Chhattisgarh ---- Petitioners

Versus

Chhattisgarh State Antyavasai Sahakari Vitta Evum Vikas Nigam ( A Govt. Of Chhattisgarh Undertaking S. T. S. C. O. B. C. And Minority Development) Through Its Managing Director Atal Nagar Raipur Chhattisgarh ---- Respondent For Petitioner :

Shri Vivek Verma, Advocate For State :

Ms. Sunita Jain, GA Hon'ble Shri Justice P. Sam Koshy Order on Board 14.06.2021

1. Heard on admission.

2. Grievance of the petitioner substantively seems to be the alleged change in the gradation list of the Field Officers under the respondents.

3. According to the petitioners, the petitioners are working on the post of Field Officers and are due to be considered for next promotion to the post of Chief Executive Officer as per the gradation list published on

-201.04.2014. According to the petitioner subsequently the gradation list that was published on the subsequent years have been changed and disturbed, aggrieved of which the petitioner made a detailed representation to the respondents and they have not taken any decision on the said representation and in all probability the next promotion to the post of Chief Executive Officer shall also be carried out at the earliest which is detrimental to the interest of the petitioner.

4. At this juncture learned counsel for the petitioner submits that let the writ petition be disposed of directing the respondents to consider and decide the representation that petitioners have made in accordance with the rules governing the field at the earliest before finalization of any further promotion process to the post of Chief Executive Officer.

5. Given the limited prayer that the petitoner has, the writ petition at this juncture stands disposed of directing the respondents to immediately consider and decide the representation of the petitioners wherby they have raised a dispute so far as changes in the gradation list that has occurred.

6. Let an appropriate decision be taken by the respondents at the earliest preferably within a period of 60 days. In addition, the petitioner would be permitted to make a fresh detailed representation to be supported with all relevant documents in support of their contentions.

7. With the aforesaid observations, the writ petition stands disposed of. Sd/- (P. Sam Koshy) Judge Rohit