Arvind Mishra v. State Of Chhattisgarh

HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR Order Sheet WPS No. 6061 of 2021 Arvind Mishra Versus State Of Chhattisgarh & Ors. 01/11/2021 Shri Dharmesh Shrivastava, Counsel for the Petitioner. Shri Gagan Tiwari, Dy. G.A. for the State.

Shri Shashank Thakur, Counsel for High Court. Heard.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that during the course of the day, he may be permitted to delete the name of Respondents No. 4 & 5 who are Civil Judge, Class II, Pali and Accountant at the District Court, from the array of respondents. Prayer is allowed.

Accordingly, name of Respondent No. 4 & 5 shall be deleted from the cause title of the writ petition during the course of the day. Matter heard finally. Order passed separately. Sd/- (Goutam Bhaduri) Judge Jyoti

HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR WPS No. 6061 of 2021 • Arvind Mishra S/o Late Shri Chandrabali Mishra Aged About 50 Years R/o New Rajaswa Colony, Tahsil Chowk, Katghore, District Korba (C.G.) ---- Petitioner

Versus

1. State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Secretary, Law And Legislative Affairs Department, Mantralaya, Mahanadi Bhawan, Atal Nagar, Nawa Raipur, District Raipur Chhattisgarh, District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh

2. The Registrar General High Court Of Chhattisgarh, Bodri, District Bilaspur (C.G.)

3. The District And Sesion Judge Korba, District Korba (C.G.) ---- Respondents ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- For Petitioner :

Shri Dharmesh Shrivastava, Advocate For Respondent/ State :

Shri Gagan Tiwari, Dy. G.A.

For Respondent No. 2 :

Shri Shashank Thakur, Advocate Hon'ble Shri Justice Goutam Bhaduri Order on Board 01.11.2021 Heard

1. Learned counsel for the petitioner who is working in District Court, Korba submit that his right to be promoted was not considered, therefore he has made a representation before Respondent No. 3 vide Annexure P-1 which may be directed to be considered.

2. Perused the documents.

3. Having considered the submission of the petitioner, it appears that petitioner

had made a representation before Respondent No. 3 vide Annexure P-1 dated 05.02.2020. Taking into such fact, District and Sessions Judge, Korba (Respondent No. 3) is directed to take into account such issue and shall decide the representation of the petitioner without any prejudice to the earlier records which exist in the file of the petitioner within outer limit of 3 months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.

4. With the aforesaid observations, the present writ petition stands disposed off. Sd/- (Goutam Bhaduri) Jyoti Judge