2025:CGHC:3481 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPS No. 3364 of 2018 1 - Dhaniram Dhruw S/o late Shri M. R. Dhruw, Aged About 61 Years Posted As Deputy Superintendent Of Police, P. T. C. Borgaon, District- Kondagaon, R/o Village- Makdi, District- North Bastar Kanker, Chhattisgarh., District : Kanker, Chhattisgarh ... Petitioner(s) versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Secretary, Home (Police) Department, Indravati Bhawan, Mantralaya, New Raipur, Chhattisgarh., District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh 2 - The Principal Secretary, Government Of Chhattisgarh, Indravati Bhawan, Mantralaya, New Raipur, Chhattisgarh., District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh 3 - The Director General Of Police, Chhattisgarh, Police Headquarter, Raipur, Chhattisgarh., District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh 4 - The Superintendent Of Police, North Bastar Kanker Chhattisgarh., District : Kanker, Chhattisgarh ---- Respondents For Petitioner : Mr. D.N. Prajapati, Advocate For State : Mr. Shubham Bajpayee, PL Hon'ble Shri Justice Rakesh Mohan Pandey Order on Board 20.01.2025 1. The petitioner has filed this petition seeking the following relief(s):- “10.1 That, this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to call for entire records of case of petitioner from respondents for Digitally signed by REKHA SINGH -2- its perusal. 10.2 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 Additional Superintendent of Police, in accordance with law. 10.3 That, any other relief/order which may deem fit and just in the facts and circumstances of the case including award of the costs of the petition may be given.” 2. Mr. Prajapati, the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner was promoted to the post of SDOP Mahasamund vide order dated 31.12.2007 issued by the Additional Secretary, State of Chhattisgarh, Home Department. He would further submit that though the petitioner was promoted but he was not permitted to join the services on the promotional post despite various representations. He would contend that a direction may be issued to the respondent authorities to consider the grievance along with the payment of all consequential benefits. 3. On the other hand, Mr. Bajpayee, the learned Panel Lawyer appearing for the State would oppose the submissions made by Mr. Prajapati. 4. Heard learned counsel appearing for the parties and perused the documents placed on the record. 5. Taking into consideration the fact that the petitioner was promoted to the post of SDOP vide order dated 31.12.2007 and he was not permitted to join the services on the promotional post, therefore, at this juncture, the present petition is disposed of as the departmental inquiry which was pending against the petitioner got concluded and a minor penalty was inflicted on the petitioner. The petitioner shall be at liberty to make a fresh representation within a period of 10 days from today and in turn, respondents No.2 & 3 are directed to take an appropriate decision in an objective manner preferably within a period of 60 days from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. 6. With the aforesaid observation(s)/direction(s), the present petition is disposed of. Sd/- (Rakesh Mohan Pandey) Judge Rekha