1 2025:CGHC:1713 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPS No. 3814 of 2011 1 - Mrs.Jayshree Shesh W/o Shri Vilas Shesh, aged about 42 years, occupation service, posted as Primary Teacher, Delhi Public School, NTPC Korba, District Korba (C.G) ... Petitioner(s) versus 1 – National Thermal Power Corporation, Korba, thourgh its General Manager, NTPC Korba (C.G.) 2- The Principal, Delhi Public School NTPC Township, Jamnipali, Korba (C.G.). 3 – The President, Delhi Public School Society, New Delhi. ... Respondent(s) For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Awadh Tripathi, Advocate For Respondent No.1 For Respondent No.2 & 3 : : Mr. Vinod Deshmukh, Advocate Mr. Anuroop Panda, Advocate ({Hon’ble Shri Justice Sachin Singh Rajput}) Order on Board 10/01/2025 1. This petition has been filed by the petitioner seeking for the following relief(s):- “This Hon’ble Court may kindly be pleased to direct the respondents to promote the petitioner on the post of TGT from the date when juniors to her have been promoted to grant all consequential benefits including seniority, arrears of pay etc. 2) Any other relief which this Hon’ble Court may deem fit and proper may also be passed in favour of the petitioner 2 together with cost of the petition. 2. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that this petition has been filed by the petitioner seeking promotion, she is presently working on the post of Primary Teacher with Respondents No.2 & 3 and not getting promotion since 1992. 3. Shri Deshmukh and Shri Panda raises a preliminary objection with regard to the maintainability of the writ petition inter-alia submitting that the petitioner is employed in an unaided education institution, therefore, this petition is not maintainable in Service matter. Mr. Panda further submits that though the petitioner is not promoted, she is being paid higher pay-scale. 4. Shri Tripathi further submits that for the present, this petition may be disposed of permitting the petitioner to make a detailed representation to respondent No.2 &3/competent authority for the grievances as projected in the writ petition, respondent No.2 &3/competent authority may be directed to consider and decide the same within the reasonable period of time in accordance with the relevant rules and law applicable to the case of petitioner and keeping in mind the service tenure of the petitioner as she was deprived for promotion for since 1992. 5. This proposition is not opposed by Mr. Deshmukha and Mr. Panda. 6. Be that as it may, after considering the submissions made by the both the parties at bar and on perusal of the documents available on record, this petition is disposed of, at this stage, permitting the petitioner to make a detailed representation before the respondent No.2 &3/competent authority projecting all his grievances as projected in this writ petition along with the copy of petition within 45 days from today and in turn respondent No.2 &3/competent authority is expected to consider and decide the same within the period of 120 days from submission of such representation in accordance with the relevant 3 rules and law applicable to the case of petitioner and also and keeping in mind the service tenure of the petitioner. 7. This Court does not express anything on the merits of this case. 8. Accordingly, this petition is disposed of with the aforesaid observations and directions. Certified Copy as per rules. Sd/- ({Sachin Singh Rajput}) JUDGE Saxena