1 2025:CGHC:31479-DB NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WA No. 456 of 2025 1 - State of Chhattisgarh Through Its Secretary Government of Chhattisgarh Department of Home (Police) Mantralaya Mahanadi Bhawan Nava Raipur Atal Nagar District Raipur (C.G.) 2 - Director Generl of Police Chhattisgarh Police Headquarters Indrvati Bhawan Nava Raipur District Raipur (C.G.) 3 - Director General Of Police Police Headquarters (Naxal Operation) Raipur Indravati Bhawan Nava Raipur District Raipur (C.G.) 4 - Additional Director General Of Police Chhattisgarh Armed Force (CAF) Chhattisgarh Headquarters Indravati Bhawan Nava Raipur District - Raipur (C.G.) 5 - Commandant Special Task Force (STF) Baghera Durg District Durg (C.G.) ... Appellants versus 1 - Lal Bahadur Tiwari S/o Shri Jagat Narayan Tiwari Aged About 40 Years Presently Posted And Working As Assistant Platoon Commander S.T.F. Baghera Durg (C.G.) 2 - Roshan Kaushik Inspector Narayanpur District Narayanpur (C.G.) 3 - Raju Ram Netam Sub Inspector Narayanpur District Narayanpur (C.G.) 4 - Sohi Bhima Head Constable S.T.F. Baghera Durg, District Durg (C.G.) 5 - Satyendra Singh Head Constable S.T.F. Baghera Durg- District Durg (C.G.) ... Respondents (Cause-title taken from Case Information System) ANURADHA TIWARI Digitally signed by ANURADHA TIWARI Date: 2025.07.09 17:07:43 +0530 2 For Appellants : Mr. Yashwant Singh Thakur, Additional Advocate General For Respondents : Mr. Sushil Dubey, Advocate Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Hon'ble Shri Bibhu Datta Guru , Judge Judgment on Board Per Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice 09.07. 2025 1. Heard Mr. Yashwant Singh Thakur, learned Additional Advocate General for the State/appellants and Mr. Sushil Dubey, learned counsel appearing for the respondents. 2. I.A. No.01, an application for condonation of delay of 126 days has been filed by the appellants/State. 3. Considering the grounds mentioned in the application (I.A. No.01), the same is allowed. Delay of 126 days in filing the appeal is hereby condoned. 4. With the consent of learned counsel for the parties, the appeal is heard finally. 5. By way of this writ appeal, appellants have prayed for following relief(s):- “It is, therefore, most humbly and respectfully prayed that, this Hon’ble Court may kindly be pleased to set aside the impugned order dated 18.11.2024, passed by the Hon’ble 3 Single Bench in Writ Petition (S) No.1143/2018, and the present writ appeal preferred by the Appellants may kindly be allowed, in the interest of justice.” 6. The present intra Court appeal has been filed against the order dated 18.11.2024 passed by the learned Single Judge in Writ Petition (S) No.1143/2018 (Lal Bahadur Tiwari v. State of Chhattisgarh and others), whereby the writ petition filed by the writ petitioner has been allowed. 7. Brief facts of the case are that as per the FIR dated 12.05.2014 as well briefing report of the Naxal operation, the writ petitioner was the leader of the cut off party and respondents No.4 and 5 were members of the cut off party, the two were awarded with out of turn promotion without giving any specific reason about why the members of the cut off party, i.e., respondents No.4 and 5 were awarded out of turn promotion and not the team leader. It is further submitted that in the briefing report of the Naxal encounter, which was prepared by Inspector Ajay Sonkar, SHO, Dornapal on 24.8.2016, the briefing officer has mentioned under the head Goodness/Merit that the Commander of Party No.02 Lal Bahadur Tiwari and his team of STF TF-21 Sodhi Bhima Constable Number 131, Constable Number 1120 Satendra Singh, Constable Number 99 Ashish Dubey, Assistant Constable Number 234 Madakam Buchha, Assistant Constable Number 601 Kadati Rama without caring about their lives and irrespective of the deadly firing 4 by the Naxalites, they demonstrated bravery and indomitable courage and bravely fought the Naxalite attack and engaged the Naxalites at one place. Seeing the police party dominating and finding themselves surrounded, the Naxalites loudly chanted each other’s names as Ramesh, Bhime, Jaggu, Podia, Rama, Bhima, Hidiya, Arjun, Hurra, Pandu Deva, Bandi, Singa and other Naxalites. They were running away by taking advantage of the dense forest while shouting – run away, run away, the policemen would surround us and kill us, even then the said police personnel ran at the Naxalites and opened fire on them. The encounter lasted for about 25-30 minutes. It is evident from the note-sheet of minutes of meeting held on 4.10.2017 that for award of out of turn promotion in which Case No.8 the representation of the writ petitioner for out of turn promotion was rejected by the Promotion Committee under the Chairmanship of Director General of Police, however, no reason was given as to why the Petitioner is not entitled to out of turn promotion. Moreover, the promotion committee has also not given any reason as to why Respondents No.4 and 5 were granted out of turn promotion and why the role of the writ petitioner, who was leader of the cut off party, was considered inferior than the members of the cut off party. 8. Being aggrieved with the inaction on the part of the authorities, the writ petitioner has filed a writ petition bearing Writ Petition (S) No.1143/2018 before the learned Single Judge, which was allowed vide order dated 18.11.2024. 5 9. Challenging the aforesaid order dated 18.11.2024 passed by the learned Single Judge in writ petition, the instant appeal has been filed by the respondents therein/State. 10. Learned counsel for the appellants submitted that the impugned order is illegal and bad in the eyes of law. He further submits that the writ petitioner along with others participated in the Naxal operation conducted on 12.05.2014 and 24.08.2016 in the area within the jurisdiction of Police Station Narayanpur, District Narayanpur and Police Station Phulbagadi, District Sukma and on the basis of their active participation the name of the writ petitioner was forwarded for rewarding him out of turn promotion. The Inspector General of Police, Bastar Range has also sent communications dated 23.06.2014 and 18.08.2014 and has forwarded the name of the writ petitioner including others for rewarding out of turn promotion. The concerned Superintendent of Police, District Narayanpur has also submitted specific proposal recommending name of the writ petitioner for out of turn promotion. However, only on the basis that the writ petitioner was a member of cut off party, he was not considered for out of turn promotion. It is submitted that since the writ petitioner was a member of the cut off party, his name has rightly not been considered for promotion, as such there is no illegality while not granting any out of turn promotion to the writ petitioner. It has been lastly contended that the learned Single Judge has erred in passing the impugned order, as such, the instant appeal be 6 allowed and the impugned order dated 18.11.2024 passed by the learned Single Judge, be set-aside. 11. On the other hand, learned counsel appearing for the respondents opposed the submissions advanced by learned counsel for the appellants/State and submits that after considering all the aspects of the matter, the learned Single Judge has rightly passed impugned order dated 18.11.2024, which does not call for any interference by this Court. 12. We have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the impugned order as well as materials available on record. 13. After appreciating the submissions of learned counsel for the State/respondents therein as also the materials on record, the learned Single Judge has passed the impugned order in following terms:- “5. There is no dispute regarding participation of the Petitioner in the Naxal operation dated 12.5.2014 and 24.8.2016. It is also not in dispute that the Petitioner along with Respondents No.6 to 9 have participated in the Naxal operation which was successfully conducted. It is further not in dispute that the names of the Petitioner as well as Respondents No.6 to 9 have been recommended for out of turn promotion by the concerned Inspector General of Police and the Superintendent of Police. Respondents No.6 to 9 have been granted 7 out of turn promotion on the basis of their participation in the Naxal operation as cut off party members in which the Petitioner was Commander. However, there is nothing on record to show that why the Commander of the cut off party has not been considered for the promotion, whereas the members of the said cut off party, i.e., Respondents No.6 to 9 have been promoted. When there are recommendations made by the concerned Respondents/authorities such as the Inspector General of Police, Bastar Range as well as the Superintendent of Police and on such recommendations Respondents No.6 to 9 have been considered for promotion, why the Petitioner has not been considered is without any reason. The Petitioner was the Commander of the cut off party and when the members of cut off party were given out of turn promotion the same cannot be denied in respect of the Petitioner. 6. In view of the aforesaid aspect of the matter, I am of the fortified view that the Petitioner is also entitled to get out of turn promotion as already given to Respondents No.6 to 9. 7. As a fall of consequence, the writ petition is allowed. The State/concerned Respondents- authorities are directed to pass appropriate orders in respect of out of turn promotion to the Petitioner from the date when Respondents No.6 to 9 have been granted 8 out of turn promotion. This exercise be done within a period of three months from the receipt of this order.” 14. Considering the matter in its entirety and after considering the submissions made by learned counsel appearing for the parties, we are of the view that the learned Single Judge has passed the impugned order with cogent and justifiable reasons and as such, we are not inclined to interfere with the impugned order dated 18.11.2024 passed by the learned Single Judge in Writ Petition (S) No.1143 of 2018 (Lal Bahadur Tiwari v. State of Chhattisgarh and others). 15. In the result, the writ appeal lacks merit substance, is liable to be and is hereby dismissed. Sd/- Sd/- (Bibhu Datta Guru) (Ramesh Sinha) Judge Chief Justice Anu