1 2025:CGHC:12123 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPS No. 1737 of 2025 1 - Vishvanath Sharma S/o. Radheshyam Sharma Aged About 44 Years Presently Working As Assistant Teacher (L.B.) At Govt. Primary School, Sevti, Block Bilha, District Bilaspur (C.G.) 2 - Jayprakash Thawait S/o Vasudev Prasad Thawait Aged About 47 Years Presently Working As Assistant Teacher (L.B.) At Govt. Primary School, Chakarbhata Gram, Block Bilha, District Bilaspur (C.G.) 3 - Smt. Mayurika Pandey W/o Rajnish Pandey Aged About 40 Years Presently Working As Assistant Teacher (L.B.) At Govt. Primary School, Chakarbhata Gram, Block Bilha, District Bilaspur (C.G.) 4 - Smt. Jaya Ratre W/o Pramod Ratre Aged About 47 Years Presently Working As Assistant Teacher (L.B.) At Govt. Janpad Primary School, Mudipar, Block Bilha, District Bilaspur (C.G.) ... Petitioners versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Secretary, Department Of School Education, Mantralaya, Mahanadi Bhawan, Atal Nagar Nawa Raipur, District Raipur (C.G.) 2 - Secretary Department Of Panchayat And Rural Development, Mahanadi Bhawan, Mantralaya, Nawa Raipur, District Raipur (C.G.) VISHAKHA BEOHAR Digitally signed by VISHAKHA BEOHAR 2 3 - Director Directorate Of Public Instructions, Indrawati Bhawan, Block- 3, First Floor, Atal Nagar Nawa Raipur, District Raipur (C.G.) 4 - District Education Officer Bilaspur, District Bilaspur (C.G.) 5 - Block Education Officer Bilha, District Bilaspur (C.G.) 6 - Chief Executive Officer Janpad Panchayat Bilha, District Bilaspur (C.G.) ... Respondents (Cause-title is taken from CIS System) For Petitioners : Mr. Bharat Lal Sahu, Advocate. For Respondent(s)/State : Ms. Sahilja Shukla, Dy. G.A. Hon’ble Mr. Justice Amitendra Kishore Prasad Order on Board 11.03.2025 1. By way of this writ petition, the petitioners have prayed for following reliefs:- “0.1 That, this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to call for the entire records in relates to the case of the petitioners from the possession of respondents for its kind perusal. 10.2 That, this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to direct the respondents to consider the case of the petitioners for grant of promotion on the post of Teacher (L.B.) and kindly further be pleased to dispose of this writ petition with the similar line as passed in the case of Dashmant Kumar Jaiswal (supra) (Annexure-P/4). 3 10.3 That, this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to grant any other relief/relief's in favour of the petitionerss, which the Hon'ble Court deemed fit & just in the facts and circumstances of the case, including awarding of the costs to the petitioners.” 2. Brief facts of the case are that the petitioners were initially appointed on the post of Shiksha Karmi-3 by the Chief Executive Officer, at their respective Janpad Panchayats. In pursuance of the appointment orders issued in their favour, the petitioners have joined at the place of their posting. The services of the petitioners were governed with the services Rules called as The Chhattisgarh Shikshak (Panchayat) Cadre (Recruitment and Service Condition) Rules, 2012 (hereinafter called to as "Rules, 2012). As per the services Rules, 2012, the criteria for promotion from the post of Assistant Teacher (Panchayat) to the post of Teacher (Panchayat) was 7 years of work experience in feeder cadre and Assistant Teacher (Panchayat) may also be promoted on the post of Teacher (Panchayat) (Library) and it was no requirement that the only Assistant Teacher (Panchayat) (Library) will be promoted on the post of Teacher (Panchayat) (Library). Thereafter, the respondents were issued executive instructions dated 12.01.2018 wherein Assistant Teacher (Panchayat) (Library) will only be considered for promotion on the post of Teacher (Panchayat) (Library), but the Rules, 2012 does not stipulated so. The aforesaid instructions issued by the respondents were challenged before this Hon'ble Court and the Hon'ble Court was pleased to 4 disposed of the aforesaid writ petition permitting the petitioners to make representations which was directed to be decided. The name of the petitioners were not considered for promotion on the post of Teacher (Panchayat) (Library) due to the aforesaid instruction dated 12.01.2018 and therefore, the petitioners have deprived their rights to be considered for promotion, whereas they have completed more than 7 years of their services and have fully eligible for promotion. Hence, this petition. 3. Learned counsel for petitioners submits that the actions on the part of the respondents are highly arbitrary and illegal. The petitioners had deprived from their rights to be considered for promotion due to the arbitrary and contrary instruction dated 12.01.2018 and that instruction was contrary to Rules, 2012. It is stated that the representation has been made by the petitioners in this regard but it has not been considered till date. 4. On the other hand, learned State counsel would submit that since the petitioners were not appointed on the post of Assistant Teacher (Librarian) (Science), therefore, they cannot claim promotion on the post of Assistant Teacher (Panchayat) Librarian Science as they were not taken birth in the cadre and unless and until they were taken birth in the specific cadre, then only their case can be considered for promotion, as such he would pray for dismissal of the writ petitions. 5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record. 5 6. It is not in dispute that initially the petitioners were appointed on the post of Assistant Teacher (Panchayat) in the year 2008 and after they never applied for appointment on the post of Assistant Teacher (Librarian) Science and have not been appointed on the post of Assistant Teacher (Librarian) whereas the Rules prescribed that the Assistant Teacher (Panchayat) (Librarian) will be promoted to the post of Teacher (Panchayat) (Librarian) after completion of seven years of service. The petitioners have nowhere contended that they have worked as Assistant Teacher (Librarian) for seven years, as such also they are not eligible for promotion on the post of Assistant Teacher (Librarian). Thus, the writ petitions deserve to be dismissed. 7. The further submission of the learned counsel for the petitioners that the impugned circular is in contravention of the statutory rules or replacing the existing rules is misconceived and deserves to be rejected as the circular dated 12.01.2018 is only clarificatory to the statutory rules. Thus, the submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioners in this regard deserves to be rejected. Accordingly, the writ petitions are dismissed. 8. This Court has taken note of the fact that all the teaching departments of Panchayat have now been merged with the School Education Department and accordingly, services of the petitioners, have also been merged with the School Education Department, therefore, it is clarified that if the respondents have initiated any procedure for promotion on the post of Assistant 6 Teacher to the post of Teacher and since the petitioners are having requisite qualification, their case shall also be considered by the respondents for promotion on the post of Teacher (local body) as per Chhattisgarh School Education Services (Educational and Administrative Cadre) Recruitment and Promotion Rules, 2019 in School Education Department, for which the petitioners shall make the representations to the School Education Department, who in turn shall consider the case of the petitioners and if the other assisting teachers who are juniors to the petitioners have been promoted on the post of Teacher (Local body), then the case of the petitioners shall also be considered within 8 weeks from the date of passing of this order for promotion on the post of Teacher (Local Body). 9. With the aforesaid observation and direction, the bunch of the writ petitions are disposed off. Sd/- (Amitendra Kishore Prasad) Judge Vishakha