Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Chhattisgarh · body

2025 DAILYLAW 29309 (CHH)

ANIL KUMAR PRAJAPATI v. STATE OF CHHATTISGARH

WPS/5629/2023 · 2025-09-10

Shri Amitendra Kishore Prasad

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

1 2025:CGHC:46657 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPS No. 5629 of 2023 1 - Anil Kumar Prajapati S/o Late Sahngu Pandit Aged About 58 Years Presently Working As Assistant Grade-3 At Government Higher Secondary School, Kachhiya, Janpad Panchayat Wadruf Nagar, Tahsil And Police Station Wadruf Nagar, District Balrampur-Ramanujganj (C.G.). ... Petitioner(s) versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Secretary, Department Of Tribal Welfare And Development, Mantralaya, Mahanadi Bhawan, Atal Nagar, Naya Raipur, District Raipur (C.G.) 2 - The Commissioner Department Of Tribal Welfare And Development, Sarguja Division Ambikapur, District Surguja (C.G.) 3 - The Collector Office Of Collectorate, Balrampur Ramanujganj, District Balrampur-Ramanujganj (C.G.) 4 - The Joint Director Directorate Of Public Instruction, Surguja Division Ambikapur, District Surguja (C.G.) 5 - The District Education Officer Balrampur Ramanujganj, District Balrampur-Ramanujganj (C.G.) RAGHVENDRA JAT Digitally signed by RAGHVENDRA JAT 2 6 - The Block Education Officer Block- Rajpur, District Balrampur- Ramanujganj (C.G.) ... Respondent(s) For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Navneet Kumar Yadav, Advocate. For Respondent(s)/State : Mr. Ajay Kumar Pandey, G.A. Hon’ble Mr. Justice Amitendra Kishore Prasad Order on Board 11/09/2025 1. By way of this petition, the petitioner has prayed for following reliefs:- “10.1 To call for the records of the case for the kind perusal of this Hon'ble Court. 10.2 To issue on appropriate writ or order and direct the respondent no.4 & 5 to consider the grievance of the petitioner for promotion from Assistant Grade III to Assistant Grade II and consequential benefits/financial up-gradation be given from date 11.08.17. 10.3. To issue an appropriate writ or order and direct the respondent authorities not only to upgrade financial benefits from date of 11.08.17 but also promotion from Assistant Grade III to Assistant Grade II and financial up- gradation from date 18.09.13 to Assistant Grade III. 10.4. Any other relief deemed fit in the facts and 3 circumstances of the case may also be granted.” 2. Brief facts of the case, is that, the petitioner is not challenging any particular order, however, pursuant to the order passed by the District Education Officer, Balrampur Ramanujganj, on 19.08.22, the petitioner was promoted from the post of Peon to Assistant Grade III and posted at Government Higher Secondary School, Kachhiya Wadruf Nagar. The petitioner had earlier filed a writ petition before this Hon'ble Court bearing registration No. 205/2022, whereby the Court directed the respondent authorities to consider his promotion. In compliance with the Hon'ble High Court’s order dated 04.05.22, a Department Promotion Committee was constituted, consisting of five members and headed by the Upper Collector, to consider the petitioner’s grievance regarding promotion. Subsequently, the District Education Officer issued the order dated 19.08.22 promoting the petitioner and posting him accordingly. Furthermore, the District Education Officer Balrampur Ramanujganj considered the petitioner’s case in the promotion list under order No. Estd/Tri Dev./2013/1349 dated 18.09.13. The petitioner also seeks consideration for promotion from Class III to Class II and financial up-gradation effective from 11.08.17, along with adjustment of seniority from the same date. Hence, this petition. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that similarly situated 4 individuals appointed as Peons were promoted to the post of Assistant Grade-III (A.G.-III) on August 11, 2017, whereas the petitioner, despite being on the same footing, was denied this benefit and was only promoted on August 19, 2022. The petitioner subsequently made a representation to Respondent No. 5 and filed a miscellaneous case before the Commissioner of Surguja Division challenging the Departmental Promotion Committee’s decision dated September 16, 2013. The Commissioner directed the authorities to consider the petitioner’s case in accordance with Rule 6(2) of the Promotion Rules, 2003, and to grant promotion within one month. However, this direction has not been implemented, and the petitioner’s promotion has not been regularized to reflect parity with those promoted in 2017. It is therefore submitted that the petitioner is entitled to be promoted to the post of A.G.-III retrospectively, on par with similarly placed employees, in the interest of justice and fairness. 4. On the other hand, learned counsel representing the State has respectfully submitted that upon a thorough examination of the petitioner’s case, if it is found that the petitioner is indeed eligible and meets the necessary criteria for promotion, the authorities will duly consider the petitioner’s case for the grant of promotion. Furthermore, such consideration will be applied retrospectively from the date of August 11, 2017, which is the same date on 5 which other individuals similarly situated were granted promotion to the post of Assistant Grade-III (A.G.-III). 5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the material available on record. 6. Considering the facts and circumstances presented in this case, the petition is hereby disposed of with a direction that the concerned respondent authorities are instructed to expeditiously examine and consider the petitioner’s case for promotion to the post of Assistant Grade-III (A.G.-III). This consideration shall be made with due regard to parity and fairness, specifically taking into account the date on which other similarly situated individuals were granted promotion, namely, the 11th of August, 2017. The promotion, if deemed appropriate, shall be granted to the petitioner with effect from that date, ensuring that no prejudice is caused to the petitioner in comparison to their counterparts. The authorities are expected to comply with this directive within a reasonable time frame and communicate their decision accordingly. 7. It is made clear that this Court has not made any opinion on merits of the case. 8. The concerned authorities are directed to consider the case of the petitioner for grant of promotion to post of A.G.-III as on 11.8.2017 in accordance with law. 6 9. This be done within a period of 45 days from the date of receipt of copy of this order. 10. With this observation and direction, the writ petition is dispose of. Sd/- (Amitendra Kishore Prasad) Judge Raghu Jat