1 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPS No. 7611 of 2025 1 - Smt. Divya Goswami W/o Shri Chandra Shekhar Goswami Aged About 36 Years R/o Qtr. No. I/4, P W D Rest House Premises, Barpali Chowk, Champa, P.S. And Tahsil - Champa, Distt- Janjgir-Champa C.G. ... Petitioner(s) versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through Its Secretary, Department Of Public Work (P W D), Mahanadi Bhawan, Mantralaya, P.S. And Post- Rakhi, Atal Nagar, Nawa Raipur, Distt. Raipur C.G. 2 - Superintendent Engineer, O/o Superintendent Engineer, Department Of Public Work Bilaspur Division, Distt. Bilaspur C.G. 3 - Executive Engineer O/o Executive Engineer, Department Of Public Work, Champa, Distt- Janjgir-Champa C.G. 4 - S. P. Sahu Sub Divisional Officer (S D O), O/o Sub Divisional Officer, Department Of Public Work, Champa, Distt- Janjgir-Champa C.G. ... Respondent(s) For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Abhishek Pandey, Advocate For Respondent(s) : Mr. Khulesh Sahu, Panel Lawyer S.B.: Hon'ble Shri Ravindra Kumar Agrawal, Judge Order On Board 23/07/2025 1. The petitioner has filed the present writ petition claiming the following relief:- SAGRIKA AGRAWAL Digitally signed by SAGRIKA AGRAWAL Date: 2025.07.24 10:52:37 +0530 2 10.1 That, this Hon’ble Court may kindly be pleased to call for the entire records in respect of the petitioner before this Hon'ble Court for its kind perusal. 10.2 That, this Hon'ble High Court may kindly be pleased to direct the Respondent No. 2. Superintendent Engineer. Bilaspur and also Respondent No. 3. Executive Engineer, Champa to decide the representation of the petitioner dated 16.05.2025 for release of salary of petitioner from the month of September 2023 and also taking strict disciplinary action against Respondent No. 4, S. P. Sahu, SDO, PWD, Champa (Annexure P/3). 10.3 That this Hon'ble Court may further be pleased to direct respondents to give suitable compensation to the petitioner for the mental trauma and agony, harassment and hardships suffered by him as also cost of the litigation. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that raising her grievances she made a representation on 16.05.2025 before the Respondent No. 3 but till date, no decision has been taken by the Respondent No. 3, therefore, the Respondent No. 3 may be directed to take a decision on her representation dated 16.05.2025 (Annexure-P/3) within the reasonable time frame. 3. The submissions made by learned counsel for the petitioner has not been opposed by the learned State counsel and would submit that they have no objection if such a direction is being given to the respondent No. 3 to take a decision on the pending representation of the petitioner. 4. Considering the submissions made by learned counsel for the parties, the Respondent No. 3 is directed to take a decision on the pending representation dated 16.05.2025 (Annexure-P/3) made by the petitioner within further period of six weeks from the date of receipt of copy of this order on its own merits in accordance with law. 3 5. The petitioner is directed to produce the copy of this order to the Respondent No. 3 within a week. 6. With the aforesaid observation, the present petition is disposed of. Sd/- (Ravindra Kumar Agrawal) Judge Sagrika