1 2025:CGHC:12944 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPS No. 1689 of 2017 Shyamlal, S/o Late Lallan, Aged About 52 Years, Occupation Service, Posted At Clerk- Il, R/o Kumda Basti, Post Office: Gangikot, P. S. : Bishrampur, District: Surajpur, Chhattisgarh. ... Petitioner versus 1 - South Eastern Coalfields Limited Through: The Chairman Cum Managing Director, Basant Vihar, Seepat Road Sarkanda, Bilaspur, District Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh. 2 - The General Manager, (P & A) Basant Vihar, Seepat Road Sarkanda, Bilaspur, District Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh. 3 - The Chief General Manager, South Eastern Coalfields Limited, Bishrampur S E C L Area, District Surajpur, Chhattisgarh. 4 - Sub Area Manager, Kumda Sub Area, Bishrampur Coal Mines Area, District Surajpur, Chhattisgarh. 5 - Ajay Tyagi, Senior Manager (Mining) Manikpur, Open Cost Mines (OCM) Korba, District Korba, Chhattisgarh The Then Siding Incharge Kumda Siding, Kumda Sub Area, Bishrampur Coal Mines Area, District Surajpur, Chhattisgarh. ... Respondents For Petitioner : Mr. S.B. Pandey, Advocate For Respondents No.1 to 4 : Mr. Rahul Mishra, Advocate PRASHANT DEWANGAN Digitally signed by PRASHANT DEWANGAN Date: 2025.03.19 10:33:55 +0530 2 Single Bench : Hon'ble Shri Justic e Sanjay S. Agrawal Order on Board 18/03/2025 1) The petitioner has filed this petition questioning the legality and propriety of the order No. SAM/K/15/2016/303 dated 28/06/2016 (Annexure P/3) passed by respondent No.4- Sub Area Manager, Kumda Sub Area, Bishrampur, Coal Mines Area, District Surajpur, whereby, the petitioner has been demoted from the post of Clerk Grade- I to Clerk Grade-II. 2) At the outset, it appears that, being aggrieved with the aforesaid order, an appeal was already preferred by the petitioner before the concerned respondent authorities of SECL, in exercise of the power provided under Rule 38 of the Coal India Executives’ Conduct, Discipline and Appeal Rules,1978, on 11/08/2016 and the same is still pending and, during the course of hearing, counsel for petitioner has prayed for issuance of direction to the concerned respondent authorities to decide the same. 3) Counsel for the respondents/SECL has raised no objection with regard to the aforesaid submissions made by the counsel for the petitioner. 4) In view of the aforesaid submissions of the parties, the Court feels that no useful purpose would be served in keeping this petition pending as it can be disposed of at this stage itself. Accordingly, this writ petition is disposed of by directing the concerned respondent 3 authorities of SECL to decide the appeal preferred by the petitioner, as soon as possible, preferably within the period of 03 months from the date of receiving the copy of this order. 5) The petition stands disposed of, with the aforesaid directions. No order as to cost(s). Sd/- (Sanjay S. Agrawal) Judge Prashant