Leela Ram Baghel v. State Of Chhattisgarh

-1NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPS No. 5831 of 2019 Leela Ram Baghel S/o Shri Laikhan Ram Baghel Aged About 50 Years SubInspector ( Ministerial), Police Training Centre, Borgaon, DistrictKondagaon, R/o -29, Tiranga Chowk, Ambedkar Ward No. 29, DistrictJadgalpur, Chhattisgarh, District : Bastar(Jagdalpur), Chhattisgarh ---- Petitioner

Versus

1. State Of Chhattisgarh Through Secretary, Department Of Home Affairs, Mantralaya, Mahanadi Bhawan, New Raipur, District- Raipur, Chhattisgarh, District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh

2. Director General Of Police, Chhattisgarh Police Headquarters, Atal Nagar, Naya Raipur, District- Raipur, Chhattisgarh, District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh

3. Additional Director General Of Police, Chhattisgarh, Police Headquarters, Atal Nagar, Naya Raipur, District- Raipur, Chhattisgarh, District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh

4. Commandant, Police Training Centre, Borgaon, District- Kondagaon, Chhattisgarh, District : Kondagaon, Chhattisgarh

5. Shri Kolharam Nagwanshi, Inspector, ( Earlier Subedar-M) Working Under The Office Of Superintendent Of Police-Jashpur, District- Jashpur, Chhattisgarh, District : Jashpur, Chhattisgarh

6. Shri Francis Xavier, Inspector, ( Earlier Subedar-M.) Working Under The Office Of Superindent Of Police, Korea, P.S.- Baikunthpur, District- Korea, Chhattisgarh, District : Koriya (Baikunthpur), Chhattisgarh ---Respondents For Petitioner :

Mr. Sangharsh Pandey, Advocate For State :

Ms. Abhyunnati Singh, P.L.

Hon'ble Shri Justice P. Sam Koshy Order on Board 06/08/2019 1.

The grievance of the petitioner in the present writ petition is the inaction on the part of the respondents in not considering the case of the petitioner for promotion from the post of Sub-Inspector (Ministerial) to the post of Inspector (Ministerial)/Subedar (Ministerial). 2.

The contention of the petitioner is that the respondents No. 5 & 6 are two of the officers, who are juniors to the petitioner, who also belong to the same

-2category i.e. scheduled tribe, to which the petitioner belongs. Yet the respondents No. 5 & 6 have been granted promotion earlier to the petitioner and no reason whatsoever has been assigned for not granting promotion to the petitioner.

3.

Given the aforesaid facts and circumstances, since the petitioner has already preferred a couple of representations to the respondents No.2 & 3, this Court is of the opinion that no fruitful purpose would be served in keeping the petition pending, rather ends of justice would meet if the writ petition is disposed of with a direction to the respondents No. 2 & 3 to decide the representation of the petitioner, so far as the claim for promotion to the post of Inspector (Ministerial) from the post of Sub-Inspector (Ministerial) is concerned.

4.

Let the respondents No. 2 & 3 take an appropriate decision within a period of 3 months from the date of receipt of the copy of this order. 5.

With the aforesaid observations, the present writ petition stands disposed off.

Sd/- (P. Sam Koshy) Judge Ved