1 2025:CGHC:43545 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPS No. 10079 of 2025 1 - Smt. Chandtara W/o Shri Prabhunath Ram, Aged About 57 Years, Occupation- Lecturer, Government Higher Secondary School Chakeri Udaipur Sarguja, District- Sarguja C.G., R/o Thana And Tahsil Udaipur, District Sarguja C.G. ... Petitioner versus 1 - State of Chhattisgarh Through Secretary, Department of School Education, Mantralaya, Mahanadi Bhawan, Atal Nagar Nawa Raipur, District Raipur C.G. 2 - Director Public Instruction (C.G.) Directorate Public Instruction Chhattisgarh First Floor C Block, Indrawati Bhawan, Atal Nagar, Raipur C.G. ... Respondents (Cause title taken from Case Information System) For Petitioner : Ms. Hamida Siddiqui, Advocate For State-Respondents : Ms. Anuja Sharma, Panel Lawyer. Hon’ble Shri Justice Ravindra Kumar Agrawal Order on Board 28-08-2025 1. The petitioner has filed the present writ petition claiming following relief(s):- “10.1 That, respondent directed to correct the final gradation list dated 17/10/2024 (Annexure P/4) showing the petitioner as trained (D.L. Ed.) 10.2 That, the respondent be directed consider the petitioner for the promotion to the post of principal from the date of 30/04/2025 from the T cadre. 10.3 That, the Petitioner claim for the promotion to the post of principal be considered. The impugned order dated 30/04/2025 the impugned order be quash. Digitally signed by MOHAMMED AADIL KHAN 2 10.4 That this Hon’ble Court may further be pleased to grant such other relief(s) as may be deemed fit and proper in the interest of justice and fair play.” 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner has restricted her submission that the petitioner has successfully cleared D.L. Ed. Examination in the year 2022-23 after obtaining due permission from the department and she made her representation for adding her D.L. Ed. Examination qualification in her service record. She also made her representation dated 03-06-2025 (Annexure-P/5) to the District Education Officer Surguja, however, the same has not been considered. She would also submit that the petitioner may be permitted to make her fresh representation to respondent No.2 and in that eventuality respondent No.2 may be directed to take a decision on the representation of the petitioner in accordance with law within a stipulated time frame. 3. On the other hand, learned counsel for the State does not have any objection if such a direction is given to the respondent No.2 to take a decision on the representation of the petitioner in accordance with law. 4. Considering the limited submission made by the counsel for the petitioner, the present writ petition is disposed of directing the petitioner to move her fresh representation to respondent No.2 within two weeks from today along with copy of this order and in the eventuality of filing of fresh representation by the petitioner before respondent No.2, the same shall be decided by respondent No.2 in accordance with law on its own merits as per the applicable rules and circulars of the department within 90 days from the date of receipt of copy of this order as well as representation. 5. With the aforesaid observation the present petition is disposed of. Sd/- (Ravindra Kumar Agrawal) Judge Aadil