1 2025:CGHC:45424 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPS No. 2807 of 2023 1 - Ranjeet Singh Sonwani S/o Chanwal Sai Sonwani Aged About 56 Years Presently Posted And Working As Head Master, Middle School, Deogaon, Block Tamnar, District : Raigarh, Chhattisgarh. ... Petitioner(s) versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Secretary, Department Of School Education, Mahanadi Mantralaya, Naya Raipur, Atal Nagar Post Office And Police Station Naya Raipur, District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh 2 - Secretary Department Of Scheduled Cast/scheduled Tribe Dev Elopment, Mahanadi Mantralaya, Naya Raipur, Atal Nagar, Post Office And Police Station Naya Raipur, District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh 3 - Director Directorate Of Public Instructions, Chhattisgarh, Indrawati Bhawan, Naya Raipur, Atal Nagar, Post Office And Police Station Naya Raipur, District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh 4 - Commissioner Department Of Scheduled Caste/scheduled Tribe Development, Chhattisgarh Raipur, District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh 5 - District Education Officer Raigarh, District : Raigarh, Chhattisgarh Digitally signed by RAGHVENDRA JAT 2 6 - Elmenda Bada Head Master, Government Middle School, Bazar Para, Raigarh, District : Raigarh, Chhattisgarh ... Respondent(s) For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Dinesh Yadav, Advocate on behalf of Mr. Anuroop Panda, Advocate. For Respondent(s)/State : Mr. Ankur Kashyap, Dy. G.A. Hon’ble Mr. Justice Amitendra Kishore Prasad Order on Board 04/09/2025 1. By way of this petition, the petitioner has prayed for following reliefs:- “i. That, this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to direct the respondent authorities to correct the gradation list dated 23/3/2023 as on 1/4/2021 and place the name of the petitioner at an appropriate place by giving proper seniority to the petitioner. ii. Cost of the petition may also be granted to the petitioner. iii. Any other relief, which this Hon'ble Court deems fit and proper, may also kindly be granted to the petitioner, in the interest of justice.” 2. Brief facts of the case, is that, the petitioner is presently posted as Head Master, Middle School, Deogaon, Block Tamnar, District Raigarh, having initially been appointed as an Assistant Teacher 3 on 01/12/1982. The next promotional post from Assistant Teacher is UDT, and though the petitioner became entitled for such promotion after completion of 12 years of service in 1998, instead of being promoted, he was merely granted the benefit of higher pay scale on the recommendation of the DPC. The petitioner was ultimately promoted as UDT only on 30/08/2005. Thereafter, upon completion of 24 years of service in 2009, he was again granted the higher pay scale equivalent to Head Master/Lecturer, but his actual promotion as Head Master was made belatedly on 28/08/2010. Up to the post of Head Master, promotions were considered at the district level, but for the post of Principal, which is the next higher promotional post from Head Master/Lecturer, a combined State-level seniority list has been prepared. In this list, several Head Masters who were appointed as Assistant Teachers either in the same year as the petitioner or even later, have been promoted earlier and placed above him. For instance, respondent No. 6, appointed as Assistant Teacher on 19/12/1988, was promoted as UDT on 29/11/1996 and as Head Master on 30/05/2000, which clearly demonstrates the anomaly in preparation of the gradation list whereby juniors have been placed above the petitioner. After his promotion as Head Master in 2010, the petitioner along with similarly situated employees submitted representations for grant of proforma seniority from the 4 year 2009, i.e., the date of his actual entitlement, but no relief was granted. The petitioner has thus been deprived of timely promotion to the post of Principal solely due to the belated grant of promotion as Head Master and his exclusion from the proper seniority list, which amounts to discrimination and violation of Article 14 of the Constitution of India. In fact, even Head Masters of primary schools under the Tribal Welfare Department in Raigarh, who too were denied timely seniority, were granted proforma seniority by order dated 24/04/2015. Despite this, in the gradation list dated 23/03/2023 (as on 01/04/2021), several juniors have again been placed above the petitioner, while his name has been placed at Serial No. 842. Aggrieved, the petitioner submitted a detailed representation on 29/03/2023 before respondent No. 3 seeking correction of the gradation list, which remains pending consideration. The impugned action of the respondents in denying proper seniority and promotion to the petitioner is arbitrary, discriminatory, and violative of Article 14 of the Constitution of India. Hence, this petition. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has already preferred a detailed representation before the competent authority seeking correction of the gradation list. It is contended that the petitioner’s position in the said gradation list has been erroneously shown, and such an error, if not rectified at the 5 earliest, would seriously prejudice and adversely affect the entire future service career of the petitioner, including his prospects of promotion, seniority, and other consequential benefits. Therefore, the petitioner prays that necessary correction in the gradation list be carried out in a just and proper manner in order to secure his rightful place in the service hierarchy. 4. On the other hand, learned counsel appearing for the State submits that in the event the petitioner has already filed any representation before the competent authority, the same shall be duly considered and decided by the said authority strictly in accordance with law, within a reasonable time frame, and in adherence to the principles of natural justice. 5. I have heard leaned counsel for the parties and perused the material available on record. 6. Considering the overall facts and circumstances of the present case, and in order to ensure that the matter is not unnecessarily kept pending, it is hereby directed that the concerned respondent authorities shall take up for consideration the representation submitted by the petitioner with regard to the correction of the gradation list, insofar as it relates to the petitioner. The authorities shall duly examine the same in accordance with law and pass a reasoned and appropriate order within a period of 60 days from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order. 6 7. It is made clear that this Court has not expressed anything on the merits of the case. 8. With the aforesaid observation and direction, the instant petition stands disposed of. Sd/- (Amitendra Kishore Prasad) Judge Raghu Jat