Keshwar Das v. State Of Chhattisgarh

NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR WPS No. 3182 of 2020 • Keshwar Das S/o Late Shri Bahal Das Aged About 61 Years R/o Parsuram Ward, Behind Excise Office, Bhatapara, P.S. And Tahsil- Bhatapara, District Baloda Bazaar, Bhatapara, Chhattisgarh ---- Petitioner

Versus

1. State Of Chhattisgarh Through Its Secretary, Department Of Excise, Mahanadi Bhawan, Mantralaya, Police Station And Post- Rakhi, Atal Nagar, Nawa Raipur, District- Raipur, Chhattisgarh

2. Upper Excise Commissioner Office Of Excise Commissioner, Mahanadi Bhawan, P.S. And Post- Rakhi, Atal Nagar, Nawa Raipur, District- Raipur, Chhattisgarh

3. District Excise Officer Office Of District Excise Officer, Department Of Excise, Baloda Bazaar, District Baloda BazaarBhatapara, Chhattisgarh

4. Ghanshyam Sao Head Constable, Department Of Excise, Office Of District Excise Officer, Mahasamund, District Mahasamund, Chhattisgarh

5. Rajkumar Kashyap Head Constable, Department Of Excise, Office Of District Excise Officer, Janjgir-Champa, District Janjgir-Champa, Chhattisgarh ---- Respondents --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- For petitioner :

Mr. Abhishek Pandey, , Advocate.

For State ;

Mr. Amrito Das, AAG.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Hon'ble Shri Justice Goutam Bhaduri Order 17-08-2020 Heard.

1. Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner, according to the gradation list dated 4-9-2019 (Annexure P/1), petitioner is much senior to respondent No.4 Ghanshyam Sao and respondent No.5 Rajkumar Kashyap,

however, ignoring the seniority of the petitioner, respondents No. 4 and 5 have been promoted by order dated 21-7-2020 (Annexure P/2). He would further submit that though the service career of the petitioner is excellent and neither any criminal case nor any departmental enquiry is pending against the petitioner, petitioner has not been considered for promotion. Therefore, under the circumstances, the petitioner may be given liberty to make a representation before respondent No.1 along with copy of the petition so that the position of the petitioner can be ascertained and the grievance can be redressed.

2. Considering the submission made by the petitioner, without any observation of the merits of the case, the petitioner is given liberty to make a representation before respondent No.1 along with relevant documents including copy of the petition within a period of two weeks and on such representation being filed, respondent No.1 shall consider and decide the same within further period of four months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.

3. With the aforesaid observation/direction, the writ petition stands disposed of.

Sd/- (Goutam Bhaduri) J U D G E Raju