1 2025:CGHC:8043 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPS No. 8250 of 2024 1 - Sanjeet Kujur S/o Shri Baleshwar Kujur, Aged About 35 Years R/o Village-Tarkhakhada, Post-Lurgikala, P.S.-City Kotwali, Tahsil And District-Balrampur (C.G.) ... Petitioner versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through- Its Additional Chief Secretary, Department Of Home/police, Mahanadi Bhawan, Mantralaya, P.S. And Post- Rakhi, Atal Nagar, Nawa Raipur, District-Raipur (Cg.) 2 - The Additional Director General Of Police (Adgp), Chhattisgarh Armed Force (Caf), Police Headquarter (Phq), Sector-19, P.S. And Post- Rakhi, Atal Nagar, Nawa Raipur, District-Raipur (C.G.) 3 - Deputy Inspector General Of Police (Digp), Office Of Digp, Stf, Baghera, District-Durg (C.G.) 4 - Superintendent Of Police (Sp), O/o Superintendent Of Police (Sp), Stf, Baghera, District-Durg (C.G.) ... Respondent(s) (Cause-title taken from Case Information System) For Petitioner : Mr. Abhishek Pandey with Ms. P.S. Nikita, Advocates For State/Respondent(s) : Mr. S. Badgaiya, Dy. GA Hon'ble Shri Justice Amitendra Kishore Prasad RAVI SHANKAR MANDAVI Digitally signed by RAVI SHANKAR MANDAVI Date: 2025.02.20 12:47:52 +0530 2 Order on Board 14/02/2025 1. Heard Mr. Abhishek Pandey with Ms. P.S. Nikita, learned counsel for the petitioner as well as Mr. S. Badgaiya, learned Dy. GA, for the State/respondent/s. 2. Since the matter is heard and decided finally, therefore, I.A. No.01/2024, which is an application for exemption from filing typed copy of the documents is allowed. 3. By way of this petition, the petitioner has sought following reliefs : “10.1 This Hon’ble Court may kindly be pleased to grant permission to prefer a representation before the respondent No.1, i.e. Additional Chief Secretary, Raipur and also may kindly be pleased to direct the respondent No.1 to consider and decide the representation of petitioner for grant of out of turn promotion on the next higher post. 10.2. This Hon’ble Court may kindly be pleased to allow any other relief as it may deem fit and proper.” 4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner seeks a direction to the respondents to consider his claim for grant of out of turn promotion to the next higher post of Constable on the claim of having rendered exemplary services in terms of provision contained in Rule 56 (3) of the Special Armed Force Rules 1973 and Regulation 70 of the Police Regulations. 3 5. The petitioner’s claim is that the petitioner had participated in an operation carried by the Armed Forces and Police Forces against nexallite. The averment made in the petition are that many other police officers who had participated in the same operation, have been granted aforesaid benefit but the petitioner has not been considered. 6. Learned counsel for the State would point out that the petitioner has filed this petition without preferring any representation. He would submit that if the petitioner prefer representation giving appropriate and relevant details of his claim, the competent authority under the Director General of Police shall examine and take appropriate decision within a reasonable time. 7. The provision contained in aforesaid two rules do make provision for consideration of cases of out of turn promotion in certain contingencies where the police officers claim to have rendered exemplary services in the manner and under the circumstances referred to in the rules. If that is the claim of the petitioner, the respondents are obliged under the law to examine the same whether the petitioners can be also granted those benefits. 8. Since the matter requires consideration at the end of the respondents upon looking into the records of the case and performance of the petitioner, I am not inclined to keep the matter pending but to dispose off with a direction to respondent No.2 to get the petitioners' claim duly examined by the authority competent under the rules and take a decision within a period of 4 three months. 9. With this observation and direction, petition is accordingly finally disposed off. Sd/- (Amitendra Kishore Prasad) Judge Ravi Mandavi