Smt. Lata Tekam v. State Of Chhattisgarh

NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR WPS No. 5599 of 2016 Smt. Lata Tekam W/o Shri Vishram Singh Tekam, Aged About 39 Years R/o C/o Chatur Singh Maravi, near Satbahaniya, Mandir, Ward No 10, Rajmahalpara, Kawardha, Distirct Kabirdham Chhattisgarh. ---- Petitioner

Versus

1. State of Chhattisgarh through the Secretary Panchayat And Rural Development, Department, Mahanadi Bhawan, Mantralaya, New Raipur Chhattisgarh

2. Chief Executive Officer, Zila Panchayat Kawardha, Distirct Kawardha Chhattisgarh

3. The Collector, District Kabirdham Chhattisgarh.

4. The District Education Officer, Distirct Kabirdham Chhattisgarh ---- Respondents For Petitioner : Shri Goutam Khetrapal, Advocate.

For Respondents/State : Shri Chandresh Shrivastava, Panel Lawyer. Hon'ble Shri Justice P. Sam Koshy Order On Board 07/10/2016

1. The grievance of the petitioner is that inspite of being fully qualified, competent and eligible for promotion to the next higher post of Teacher (Panchayat) and inspite of vacancy being available, the respondents are not holding DPC for promotion to the next higher post.

2. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that identical writ petition came up for consideration i.e. WPS No.5118 of 2016 (Smt. Sunita Wasnik Vs. State of Chhattisgarh & Ors). This court on 23.09.2016 had disposed of the said writ petition with a direction to the respondents to

consider the case of the petitioner and to decide the petitioner's representation within a period of six months from the date of receipt of representation.

3. Counsel for the petitioner prays that this petition may also be disposed of in similar terms as of WPS No. 5118 of 2016.

4. Learned counsel for the State, on verifying the facts submits that the case of the petitioner is also identical in nature as that of WPS No. 5118 of 2016 and therefore, this petition may also be disposed of in similar terms.

5. Accordingly, the petition is disposed of in terms of order dated 23.09.2016 passed in WPS No. 5118 of 2016. It is directed that in case the petitioner moves a representation, the same shall be considered and decided by the concerned respondent in accordance with rules governing the field by passing a reasoned order so far as claim of the petitioner is concerned, within an outer limit of six months from the date of receipt of representation so made.

6. With the aforesaid observation, the writ petition stands finally disposed of. No order as to costs.

Sd/- (P.Sam Koshy) Judge inder