1 2025:CGHC:43415 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPS No. 1877 of 2022 1 - Kamal Sai Bhagat S/o Birlbal Ram, Aged About 57 Years Working As Upper Division Teacher, Middle School, Kosampoara, Aani, Block-Baikunthpur, District Korea Chhattisgarh. ... Petitioner(s) versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Secretary,school Education Department, Mahanadi Bhawan, Mantralaya, Nawa Raipur, Atal Nagar, District Raipur Chhattisgarh. 2 - The Director, Public Instructions Chhattisgarh, Indravati Bhawan, Nawa Raipur, Atal Nagar, District Raipur Chhatitsgah. 3 - The District Education Officer, Baikunthpur, District Korea Chhattisgarh. ... Respondent(s) For Petitioner : Ms. Priya Kaiwart, Advocate holding the brief of Sangeet Kumar Kushwaha, Advocate. For Respondent/ State : Shri Shubham Bajpayee, P.L. Hon'ble Shri Justice Rakesh Mohan Pandey Order on Board 26.08.2025 1. The petitioner has filed this petition seeking the following reliefs:- NIRMALA RAO 2 “10.1 That, this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to issue an appropriate writ, thereby directing the respondent authorities to consider the case of petitioner for promotion to the post of Lecturer, in accordance with law, within stipulated time. 10.2 That any other relief/order which may deem fit and just in the facts and circumstances of the case including award of the cost of the petition may be given.” 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the name of the petitioner was not considered for promotion to the post of Lecturer from the post of Upper Division Teacher on 30.5.2017 due to pendency of a departmental enquiry. She would contend that the departmental enquiry has since been concluded and the petitioner has been exonerated of all the charges. She would submit that a direction may be issued to the respondent authorities to consider the claim of the petitioner for promotion to the post of Lecturer. 3. On the other hand, learned counsel for the State would oppose the submissions made by counsel for the petitioner. He would submit that although the petitioner was exonerated, a penalty of warning was inflicted. 4. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the documents present on the record. 5. Considering the fact that the departmental enquiry was pending against the petitioner in 2017, therefore, his name was not considered for promotion and at present, no enquiry is pending, therefore, respondents No.2 & 3 are directed to consider the claim of the petitioner for promotion to the next higher post i.e. Lecturer. The 3 petitioner shall be at liberty to make a representation within a period of 30 days and in turn, respondents No.2 & 3 are directed to consider the matter and take an appropriate decision strictly in accordance with law, preferably, within a further period of 90 days. 6. With the aforesaid observation(s), this petition is disposed of. Sd/- (Rakesh Mohan Pandey) Judge Nimmi