B. P. Gupta v. State Of Chhattisgarh

-1NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR Writ Petition (S) No. 5586 of 2016 B. P. Gupta S/o Late Shri R. S. Gupta, aged about 56 years, In- Charge Sub Divisional Officer, Rural Engineering Service, Sub Division, Takhatpur, District Bilaspur, (Chhattisgarh) ---- Petitioner

Versus

State of Chhattisgarh through Secretary, Department of Rural Engineering Service, Mahanadi Bhawan, Naya Raipur, District Raipur, (Chhattisgarh) ---- Respondent For Petitioner :

Shri T. K. Jha, Advocate.

For Respondent :

Shri Sangharsh Pandey, P.L.

Hon'ble Shri Justice P. Sam Koshy Order on Board 07/10/2016 The present petition has been filed challenging the action on the part of the respondent authority in not granting promotion to the petitioner to the post of Assistant Engineer.

2.

It is the case of the petitioner that the juniors to him have already been granted promotion but no reason has been assigned by the respondent as to why he has been denied the promotion. 3.

Counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has already made a representation on 21.07.2016 in respect of his non consideration for promotion but the same has not been considered till date by the respondent. Therefore, counsel for the petitioner prays that the respondent may be directed to consider the representation of the petitioner for promotion.

-24.

State counsel at this juncture submits that the State does not have any objection if the present petition is disposed of with a direction to the respondent authority to decide the representation of the petitioner in accordance with law.

5.

In view of the same, without entering into the merit of the case, the present petition is disposed of with a direction that in case the representation of the petitioner which according to him he had made on 21.07.2016 is pending before the Secretary, Department of Rural Engineering Services, the same be decided within a period of four months from the date of furnishing of the certified copy of this order. It is expected that the authority concerned shall pass a speaking order. 6.

It is made clear that this Court has not expressed anything on the merit of the case and the authority concerned would be at liberty to decide the representation of the petitioner strictly in accordance with the rule governing the field.

7.

With the aforesaid observation, the present writ petition stands disposed of.

Sd/- (P. Sam Koshy) JUDGE Bhola