1 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPS No. 9792 of 2025 1 - Gajendra Puri Goswami S/o Late Shri Mohan Puri Goswami Aged About 56 Years Teacher (L.B.) Govt. H.S. School Khardhuli Block Doundilohara, District : Balod, Chhattisgarh ... Petitioner(s) versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through Secretary, Department Of Panchayat And Social Welfare Mahanadi Bhawan, Mantralaya New Raipur, District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh 2 - Secretary Education Department Mantralaya New Raipur, District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh 3 - Director Panchayat Indrawati Bhawan Atal Nagar New Raipur, District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh 4 - District Education Officer Balod, District : Balod, Chhattisgarh. 5 - Chief Executive Officer Zila Panchayat Balod, District : Balod, Chhattisgarh ... Respondent(s) For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Ajay Shrivastava, Advocate For Respondent(s) : Mr. Santosh Bharat, Panel Lawyer Hon'ble Shri Justice Ravindra Kumar Agrawal Order on Board 26/08/2025 1. The claim of the petitioner in the present petition is with regard to grant of 1st and 2nd Kramonnati Vetanman. SAGRIKA AGRAWAL Digitally signed by SAGRIKA AGRAWAL Date: 2025.08.26 18:00:53 +0530 2 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that with regard to award of the 1st and 2nd Kramonnati Vetanman, some circular has been issued by the respondent/State. Apart from this, Division Bench of this Court in case of “Smt Sona Sahu v. State of Chhattisgarh and others” in WA No. 261 of 2023 has also considered the identical issue. The petitioner is also entitled for the 1st and 2nd Kramonnati Vetanman. He further submits that at present, this petition may be disposed of with liberty to the petitioner to make a representation to respondents/ competent authority in light of order passed by this Court in WA No. 261 of 2023. 3. Learned State counsel opposes the submissions made by learned counsel for the petitioner. 4. Be that as it may, looking to the limited prayer made by the learned counsel for petitioner, this petition, at this stage, is disposed of permitting the petitioner to make representation raising all grounds as raised in the writ petition to respondents/competent authority annexing all relevant documents, and judgment of this Court passed in WA No. 261 of 2023. On such representation being made, it is expected that the respondents/competent authority shall consider the same in accordance with law, considering the circular(s) issued in this regard, in light of judgment of this Court in WA No. 261 of 2023 within further period of four months from the date of receipt of such representation. 5. It is made clear that this Court has not expressed any opinion on merits of the case, and it is for respondents/competent authority to consider the claim of petitioner on its own merits. 6. With this observation, the present writ petition stand disposed of. Sd/- (Ravindra Kumar Agrawal) Judge sagrika