G.H. Trinath Reddy v. Chhattisgarh State Civil Supplies Corporation Limited

NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR Writ Petition (S) No. 2911 of 2021 G. H. Trinath Reddy S/o Late Shri G. Bhagavati Rao, Aged About 46 Years, Working As Manager (Finance), Chhattisgarh State Civil Supplies Corporation Limited, Block - 7, Second Floor, Office Complex, Sector - 24, Atal Nagar, Nawa Raipur, District Raipur, Chhattisgarh. ---- Petitioner

Versus

1. Chhattisgarh State Civil Supplies Corporation Limited Through Its Managing Director, Chhattisgarh State Civil Supplies Corporation Limited, Block - 7, Second Floor, Office Complex, Sector - 24, Atal Nagar, Nawa Raipur, District Raipur, Chhattisgarh

2. Jitendra Kumar Agrawal Working As Deputy Accounts Officer, Chhattisgarh State Civil Supplies Corporation Limited, Block - 7, Second Floor, Office Complex, Sector - 24, Atal Nagar, Nawa Raipur, District Raipur, Chhattisgarh ---- Respondents For Petitioner :

Mr. Shakti Singh under instruction of Mr. Anish Tiwari, Advocate For Respondent no.1 :

Mr. Syed Majid Ali, Advocate Hon'ble Shri Justice P. Sam Koshy Order On Board 24.06.2021

1. Counsel for the petitioner submits that as of now the grievance of the petitioner would stand redressed if the writ petition is disposed of directing the respondent no.1 to consider and decide the representation that the petitioner has made against the promotion given to respondent no.2.

2. The case of the petitioner is that he was working on the post of Assistant Accounts Officer and the next promotional post for the petitioner was the post

of Deputy Accounts Officer. The criteria for promotion was merit-cumseniority and the petitioner being senior than respondent no.2 and that no adverse order operating against the petitioner, he was entitled to be promoted ahead of respondent no.2. According to the petitioner, immediately upon the respondent no.2 getting promoted he has made a representation vide Annexure P-3 dated 18.03.2021 with a reminder of 27.05.2021 which till date is pending and the same may be directed to be decided by the respondent no.1.

3. Counsel appearing for the respondent no.1 does not oppose the limited relief that the petitioner seeks.

4. In view of the same, the writ petition at this juncture stands disposed of directing the respondent no.1 to consider and decide the representation that the petitioner has already made. In addition, the petitioner would also be at liberty to file a fresh representation supported with all relevant documents in support of his contentions within a period of 10 days from today. The respondents are expected to take a decision on the representation of the petitioner at the earliest preferably within a period of 60 days from the date of submission of a fresh representation by the petitioner.

5. The writ petition accordingly stands disposed of. Sd/- P. Sam Koshy Judge Khatai