High Court Of ChhattisgarhWPS/4657/2016disposed off

Dev Raj v. State Of Chhattisgarh

2016-09-15Hon'Ble Shri Justice Manindra Mohan Shrivastava2 pages

-1NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR WPS No. 4657 of 2016 Dev Raj S/o Shri D. Guriya, Aged About 56 Years R/o Police Training School, Mana, Police Station Mana, Tahsil And District Raipur, (Chhattisgarh) ---- Petitioner

Versus

1. State Of Chhattisgarh Through Secretary, Department Of Home Secretary, Mahanadi Bhawan, New Raipur, P.S. And Post Rakhi, District Raipur, (Chhattisgarh)

2. Director General Of Police ( D G P), Police Headquarter ( P H Q) Near Mahanadi Bhawan, New Raipur, P.S. And Post Rakhi, District Raipur, (Chhattisgarh)

3. Inspector General Of Police ( I. G. P.), Office Of Inspector General Of Police, Shankar Nagar, Raipur, District Raipur, (Chhattisgarh)

4. Superintendent Of Police ( S. P.), Police Training School ( P. T. S.) Mana, Police Station Mana, Raipur, District Raipur, (Chhattisgarh) ---- Respondents For Petitioner :

Shri Abhishek Pandey, Advocate For State :

Shri Bhaskar Payashi, Panel Lawyer S.B.:

Hon'ble Shri Justice Manindra Mohan Shrivastava Order On Board 15/09/2016 Heard on admission.

1. By way of this petition, the petitioner has prayed that he may be allowed to appear in the examination for promotion to the higher post similar to Constable (General Duty).

2. This Court, in the case of Baidyanath Tiwari Vs. State of MP and Ors.

-2- (WPS No.1066 of 2005 decided on 13.4.2010), in an almost similar petition, has directed the respondents to consider the case of the petitioner for promotion strictly in accordance with the scheme as expeditiously as possible.

3. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner pray for similar order.

4. Learned counsel appearing for the State would submit that in case the petitioner files a representation in this regard, the respondents shall consider the same in the manner as directed by this Court in Baidyanath Tiwari's case.

5. In view of above submissions made by the parties, if the petitioner files a representation before the competent authority for considering his case in accordance with scheme and as directed by this Court in Baidyanath Tiwari's case, the same shall be considered accordingly by the respondents expeditiously.

6. With the aforesaid observation, the petition stands disposed off. No order as to costs.

Sd/- (Manindra Mohan Shrivastava) Judge Praveen