High Court Of ChhattisgarhWPS/6778/2018disposed off

Kamal Lal Sahu v. State Of Chhattisgarh

2018-10-22Hon'Ble Shri Justice P. Sam Koshy2 pages

NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPS No. 6778 of 2018 Kamal Lal Sahu S/o Shri Parghaniya Lal Sahu Aged About 51 Years Posted As Upper Division Teacher At Govt. Middle School, Nedgaon, Vikas Khand- Manpur, District- Rajnandgaon, Chhattisgarh. ---- Petitioner

Versus

1. State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Secretary, Department Of School Education Mantralaya, Mahanadi Bhawan, Atal Nagar, District- Raipur, Chhattisgarh.

2. The Secretary Department, Of Tribal Welfares Mantralaya, Mahanadi Bhawan, Atal Nagar, District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh

3. Director Of Public Instruction First Flore, C Block Indrawati Bhawan, Atal Nagar, District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh

4. Shri Savendr Vinayk Posted As Upper Division Teacher At Govt. Middle School, Parsatola, Vikas Khand-Chowki, District : Rajnandgaon, Chhattisgarh

5. Shri Dharam Singh Sahare Posted As Upper Division Teacher At Govt. Middle School, Parsatola, Vikas Khand-Chowki, District- Rajnandgaon, Chhattisgarh.

----Respondents For Petitioner :

Mr. Akhand Pratap, Advocate For State :

Mr. R.N. Pusty, Govt. Advocate Hon'ble Shri Justice P. Sam Koshy Order on Board 22/10/2018

1. The whole dispute in the present Writ Petition arises out of the impugned order dated 07/09/2018 Annexure P/1 an order of promotion from the post of Upper Division Teacher to the post of Lecturer.

2. The grievance of the petitioner is that, the persons junior to the petitioner have been promoted by the impugned order.

3. However, the claim of the petitioner for no reason has been left out.

4. The counsel for the petitioner drew the attention of this Court to the status of the respondent No.4 whose position in the seniority list was at Sr. No. 982 and who has been considered for promotion ignoring the

claim of the petitioner whose position in the seniority list stands at Sr.No. 791.

5. Likewise, the petitioner also submits that, the name of the respondent No.5 does not reflect in the seniority list at all.

6. Given the facts and circumstances of the case, let the representation which the petitioner has made to the respondent No.3 be decided at the earliest.

7. The petitioner would also be at liberty to file a fresh representation if he so chooses giving entire details of his seniority, etc.

8. On receipt of such representation, the respondent No.3 shall in turn after due scrutiny of the record decide the same at the earliest preferably within 4 months from the date of receipt of fresh representation.

9. It shall be the responsibility of the petitioner to apprise the respondent No.3 so far as the order passed by this Court is concerned.

10. The Writ Petition accordingly stands disposed off. Sd/- (P. Sam Koshy) Judge Ved