1 2025:CGHC:40880 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPS No. 8367 of 2025 1 - Hitendra Kumar Borkar S/o Shri Manishankar Borkar Aged About 43 Years Posted As Lab Technician At Shahid Gendsingh Government College, Charama, Tahsil Charama, District - North Bastar Kanker (C.G.) ... Petitioner(s) versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Secretary, Department Of Higher Education Mahanadi Bhawan, Mantralaya, Atal Nagar, Nawa Raipur (C.G.) 2 - Commissioner Directorate Of Higher Education Indrawati Bhawan, Atal Nagar, Nawa Raipur (C.G.) 3 - Additional Director Directorate Of Higher Education Indrawati Bhawan, Atal Nagar, Nawa Raipur (C.G.) 4 - Principal Shahid Gendsingh Government College, Charama, Tahsil Charama, District - North Bastar Kanker (C.G.) ... Respondent(s) (Cause title taken from Case Information System) For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Pramod Ramteke, Advocate For Respondent(s)/State : Mr. Vinay Pandey, Deputy A.G. and Mr. Suyashdhar Badgaiya, Deputy G.A. Hon’ble Shri Justice Ravindra Kumar Agrawal Order on Board 13/08/2025 1. The petitioner has claimed the following reliefs in the writ petition: VEDPRAKASH DEWANGAN Digitally signed by VEDPRAKASH DEWANGAN Date: 2025.08.14 19:36:00 +0530 2 “10.1 That, this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to issue a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order or direction to the respondent authorities to regularize the petitioner's services as Lab Technician with effect from 06.02.2015, the date of completion of his probation period. 10.2 That, this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to direct the respondent authorities to grant all consequential benefits, including pay fixation, annual increments and arrears to the petitioner from 06.02.2015. 10.3 That, this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to grant any other relief, as it may deems fit and appropriate.” 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner would restrict his submission that in view of the order dated 17-12-2024 passed in WPS No. 3949 of 2020 and other batch of writ petitions, the petitioner may be permitted to make his representation before the respondents No. 2 and 3 to redress his grievances and they may be directed to take a decision on the representation of the petitioner, in accordance with law, within the stipulated time frame. 3. On the other hand, learned counsel appearing for the State would submit that they have no objection, if such a direction is being made to take a decision on the representation of the petitioner, in accordance with law, within the stipulated time frame. 3 4. Considering the limited submissions made by learned counsel for the petitioner, the present writ petition is disposed of directing the petitioner to make his representation within two weeks along with a copy of this order to the respondents No. 2 and 3, and in the eventuality of filing the representation before the respondents No. 2 and 3 within the stipulated time frame, the respondents No. 2 and 3 are directed to take a decision in accordance with law, on its own merits, keeping in view the order dated 17-12-2004 passed in WPS No. 3949 of 2020 and other batch of petitions after examining the records of the petitioner within the outer limit of 05 months from the date of receipt of the representation. 5. With the aforesaid observations, the present writ petition is disposed of. Sd/- (Ravindra Kumar Agrawal) Judge ved