1 2025:CGHC:16539 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPS No. 4369 of 2018  Santosh Kumar Banjare S/o A. D. Banjare Aged About 41 Years Caste Satnami, Lecturer Of Government Adarsh Higher Secondary School Jashpurnagar, District Jashpur Chhattisgarh, District : Jashpur, Chhattisgarh ... Petitioner(s) versus 1. State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Secretary Department Of Schedule Caste And Schedule Tribes Welfare, Mantralaya, Mahanandi Bhawan, New Raipur District Raipur Chhattisgarh, District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh 2. Commissioner Department Of Schedulw Caste And Schedule Tribes Welfare, Mantralaya, Indrawati Bhawan, New Raipur District Raipur Chhattisgarh, District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh 3. Secretary Department Of School Education Government Of Chhattisgarh Mahanandi Bhawan, Raipur District Raipur Chhattisgarh, District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh 4. Director Directorate Of Public Education, Indrawati Bhawan, Block-Iii, First Floor, New Raipur District Raipur Chhattisgarh, District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh 5. District Education Officer Office Of District Education Officer Jahspur District Jashpur Chhattisgarh, District : Jashpur, Chhattisgarh ... Respondent(s) (Cause Title is taken from Case Information System) For Petitioner : Mr. Chandresh Shrivastava, Advocate For State : Ms. Shailja Shukla, Panel Lawyer Hon'ble Shri Justice Rakesh Mohan Pandey Order on Board 08. 04.2025 1. By way of this petition, the petitioner has sought the following relief(s):- SIDDHANT TAMRAKAR Digitally signed by SIDDHANT TAMRAKAR Date: 2025.04.09 14:15:28 +0530 2 “10.1 That, the Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to call for entire records of the present case. 10.2 That the Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to quash the impugned orders dated 03/02/2017 (Annexure P-1) and 10/03/2017 (Annexure P-2). 10.3 The Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to direct the respondent authorities to issue order of posting in favour of the petitioner against the promoted post of lecturer (History) in accordance with order dated 02.12.2014. 10.4 That the Hon'ble Court may kindly pleased to direct the respondent authorities to allow all the benefits of promotions to the petitioner including pay scale from the date when he had been promoted and submitted joining against the post of lecturer (History). 10.5 Any other relief, which this Hon’ble Court may deem fit and proper may also be awarded to the petitioner including the cost of the petition.” 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner was promoted to the post of Lecturer from the post of Head Master vide order dated 02.12.2014. He would further submit that pursuant to orders passed in WPS No. 2479 of 2015 and WPS No. 310 of 2016, a review DPC was convened by the department and the promotion order of the petitioner was canceled vide order dated 03.02.2017 on the ground that in the earlier DPC, the procedure was not followed and the claim of some of the teachers was not considered by the Departmental Promotion Committee. He would also submit that later on the petitioner was promoted to the post of Lecturer vide order dated 14.01.2019 with effect from 29.09.2018. He would contend that the respondents failed to provide the opportunity before the cancellation of the promotion order dated 03.02.2017; therefore, the order is bad in law. 3. On the other hand, learned counsel appearing for the State would submit 3 that the DPC was convened in the year 2014, but the procedure was not followed and many eligible candidates were not considered for promotion to the next higher post and against that action, WPS No. 2479 of 2015 and WPS No. 310 of 2016 were filed before the High Court. She would further submit that directions were issued to conduct a fresh DPC, and thereafter, a review DPC was convened and it was found that in the year 2014, the petitioner was not eligible for promotion to the post of Lecturer. She would also submit that subsequently, the case of the petitioner was considered and he was promoted to the post of Lecturer vide order dated 14.01.2019 with effect from 29.09.2018. She would contend that the instant petition deserves to be dismissed. 4. I have heard learned counsel appearing for the parties and perused the documents placed on the record. 5. Taking into consideration the fact that no opportunity of hearing was afforded to the petitioner while canceling the order of promotion vide order dated 03.02.2017; this petition, at this juncture, is disposed of reserving liberty in favour of the petitioner to make a representation before the respondent authorities claiming therein seniority from 02.12.2014 when he was promoted to the post of Lecturer, and in turn, the respondent authorities are directed to consider the claim of the petitioner strictly in accordance with the law. 6. With the aforesaid observation(s), and direction(s), the instant petition is hereby disposed of. Sd/- (Rakesh Mohan Pandey) Judge $iddhant