1 2025:CGHC:40601 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPS No. 8049 of 2025 1 - Smt. Ritu Nayak W/o Shri Neeraj Kumar Nayak, Aged About 36 Years Occupation - Teacher, Science (English Medium) At Govt. Girls Middle School, Berla, District - Bemetara (C.G.) ... Petitioner(s) versus 1 - State of Chhattisgarh Through The Secretary,department Of Higher Education, Mahanadi Bhawan, Mantralaya, Nawa Raipur, Atal Nagar District Raipur (C.G.) 2 - The Commissioner (Higher Education), Directorate Of Higher Education,indrawati Bhawan, Nawa Raipur,atal Nagar, District - Raipur (C.G.) 3 - The Additional Director, Directorate Of Higher Education, Indrawati Bhawan, Nawa Raipur, Atal Nagar, District - Raipur (C.G.) 4 - The Principal, Govt. Naveen College, Berla, District - Bemetara (C.G.) ... Respondent(s) For Petitioner (s) : Shri Anirudh Shrivastava, Advocate. For State : Ms. Smita Jha, Panel Lawyer. Hon’ble Shri Justice Ravindra Kumar Agrawal, J Order on Board 12.08. 202 5 1. Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that petitioner was appointed on 01.02.2013, joined on the post of Lab Technician on 11.02.2013 and she worked till 24.08.2021. At the time when she was appointed on 01.02.2013, she was kept on probation for a period of two years, and subsequently, her probation period was extended for one more year, but there is no subsequent order with respect to extension of probation period. She worked there till 15.09.2021 as Lab Technician, and thereafter, she resigned to her post. It is 2 further submitted that the other admissible benefits, as extended to other regular employees, have not been granted to the present petitioner, for which she has submitted a representation to the authorities on 06.05.2025 but till date, her representation has not been considered. Therefore, the authorities may be directed to consider her representation dated 06.05.2025 in accordance with law. 2. On the other hand, learned State counsel though opposes the petition on merits, however, he would submit that he has no objection if such a direction is being made to the authorities to decide the representation submitted by the petitioner in accordance with law within stipulated time frame. 3. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the documents annexed with the petition. 4. Considering the submissions made by learned counsel for the parties and the issue involved in the petition, the respondent No.2 is directed to take a decision in accordance with law, and also applicable Rules and Circulars of the Department, as early as possible. 5. Petitioner is directed to produce copy of this order before respondent No.2 within two weeks from today. 6. With the aforesaid observation, present petition stands disposed of. Sd/- (Ravindra Kumar Agrawal) Judge inder