1 2025:CGHC:45992 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPS No. 8004 of 2022  Praveen Kumar Jaiswal S/o Late Shri J.P. Jaiswal Aged About 49 Years Resident Of Bouripara, Ambikapur, District - Sarguja (C.G.) ... Petitioner(s) versus 1. State Of Chhattisgarh Through Secretary, Department Of Home, Mahanadi Bhawan, Mantralaya, Atal Nagar, New Raipur, District - Raipur (C.G.) 2. Director General Of Police Police Head Quarter Raipur, District – Raipur 3. Inspector General Of Police Sarguja Range Ambikapur, District - Sarguja, Chhattisgarh (C.G.) 4. District Treasury Officer Balrampur, District - Balrampur-Ramanujganj (C.G.) ... Respondent(s) For Petitioner : Mr. Barun Kumar Chakrabarty, Advocate holding the brief of Mr. Ajay Shrivastava, Advocate For State : Mr. Raj Kumar Gupta, Addl. Advocate General Hon'ble Shri Justice Rakesh Mohan Pandey Order on Board 09. 09.2025 1. By way of this petition, the petitioner has sought the following relief(s):- “10.1 That, this Hon’ble Court may kindly be pleased to direct the respondent authorities to consider the petitioner for monitory seniority and other admissible benefit of promotion on the post of S.I. (M) with all consequential benefit within stipulated time, in the interest of justice. 10.2 Any other relief which may be suitable in the facts and circumstances of the case, may also be granted.” SIDDHANT TAMRAKAR Digitally signed by SIDDHANT TAMRAKAR Date: 2025.09.12 10:59:23 +0530 2 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that name of the petitioner was considered and he was found fit for promotion to the post of Sub- Inspector(M) vide order dated 08.07.2010, but the said order was not given effect to on account of registration of criminal case and subsequently, a departmental enquiry. He would contend that various representations were made, but till date, no decision has been taken. He would pray that a direction may be issued to respondent No. 3 to consider and decide the pending representations of the petitioner expeditiously, strictly in accordance with the law. 3. On the other hand, Mr. Raj Kumar Gupta, Addl. Advocate General would submit that till 2017, petitioner worked with the department, and thereafter, he joined the Civil service on the post of Deputy Treasury Officer in the month of December, 2017. He would further submit that as the petitioner is not member of the police department, he cannot claim seniority or other benefits attached to the post of Sub-Inspector or Assistant Sub-Inspector. He would contend that as the criminal case as well as departmental enquiry were pending against the petitioner, therefore, promotion order was not given effect to. He would further contend that the petitioner is not entitled for any monetary benefits. He would contend that this petition deserves to be dismissed. 4. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the documents placed on record. 5. Admittedly, the petitioner has joined post of Deputy Treasury Officer with the State Civil Services in the month of December, 2017. The name of the petitioner was considered for promotion from post of Assistant Sub- Inspector to the post of Sub-Inspector in the year 2010, but on account of pendency of criminal case as well as departmental enquiry, the said order 3 was not given effect to. The petitioner admitted the guilt and paid the fine in criminal case and in departmental enquiry, penalty of fixing the pay at the minimum was inflicted, which was modified in the appeal. 6. Be that as it may, if the representations made by the petitioner are pending before the respondent authorities, the authorities concerned are directed to decide the pending representations moved by the petitioner expeditiously. 7. It is made clear that this Court has not expressed any opinion on the merits of the case. 8. With the aforesaid observation(s), and direction(s), the instant petition is hereby disposed of. Sd/- (Rakesh Mohan Pandey) Judge $iddhant