1 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPS No. 8556 of 2022 1 - Ritu Gupta D/o Shri Bal Krishna Gupta Aged About 40 Years Working As Supervisor, At O/o The Project Officer, Integrated Child Development Scheme, Chhuikhadan, District Rajnandgaon Chhattisgarh ... Petitioner(s) versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through Its Secretary, Department Of Women And Child Development, Mantralaya, Mahanadi Bhawan, Nawa Raipur Atal Nagar Raipur District Raipur Chhattisgarh 2 - The Director Department Of Women And Child Development, Chhattisgarh, H. Q. Block 1, 2nd Floor, Indrawati Bhawan, Nawa Raipur, Atal Nagar Raipur District Raipur Chhattisgarh 3 - The Distric Program Officer Woman And Child Development Department, Rajnandgaon District Rajnandgaon Chhattisgarh 4 - The Project Officer Women And Child Development Department, Chhuikhadan, District Rajnandgaon Chhattisgarh ... Respondent(s) For Petitioner/s : Shri Rajesh Kumar Kesharwani, Advocate. For Respondent/s : Shri Abhishek Singh, Advocate. NIRMALA RAO 2 Hon’ble Shri Justice Rakesh Mohan Pandey Judgment On Board 25.6.2026 1) The petitioner has filed this petition seeking the following reliefs: “a. This Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to issue a writ in the nature of mandamus or suitable direction to the respondents for grant of consequential benefits of services e. g. salary & arrears of the period from 19/02/2018 up to 15/09/2022. b. May kindly be pleased to direct the respondents for order of confirmation as the petitioner has successfully completed her probation period and may kindly be pleased to grant annual grade increments and other benefits granted to the regular employee. c. May kindly be pleased to allow any other relief as the Hon'ble Court may be deemed fit and proper. d. Cost of petition may kindly be allowed.” 2) Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner was appointed on the post of Supervisor on probation for a period of two years vide order dated 30.8.2011 in the Department of Women & Child Development. He would submit that no specific order was issued with regard to completion of two-year probation period, therefore, the petitioner filed this petition. He would contend that during the pendency of this petition, respondent No.2 issued an order of completion of the probation period on 3 17.6.2026. He would submit that the relief sought in para 10(b) has been redressed. He would further contend that the petitioner was on medical leave for a certain period and thereafter approached the respondent authorities to resume her services on 19.2.2018 but she was not permitted, and therefore, she could not joined her services till 15.2.2022. He would contend that the petitioner may be permitted to make a fresh representation before respondents No.1 & 2 and in turn, the concerned authorities may be directed to decide the same expeditiously strictly in accordance with law. 3) On the other hand, learned counsel for the respondents would oppose the submissions made by counsel for the petitioner. He would submit that the main grievance of the petitioner with regard to probation has already been redressed and thus, the petition deserves to be dismissed. 4) I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the documents placed on record. 5) It appears that the order with regard to completion of the probation period has already been passed by respondent No.2 on 17.6.2026 but no decision has been taken with regard to the period of absence from 19.2.2018 till 15.2.2022. Therefore, at this juncture, this petition is disposed of with liberty to the petitioner to make a representation before respondents No.1 & 2 within a period of 30 days from the date of receipt of a copy of this order and the 4 concerned authorities are directed to decide the same expeditiously, strictly in accordance with law, within a period of 120 days. 6) Accordingly, the present writ petition is disposed of. Sd/- (Rakesh Mohan Pandey) JUDGE Nimmi