1 2025:CGHC:50177 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPS No. 2722 of 2023 1 - Chyawan Prasad Gupta S/o Deoraj Gupta Aged About 61 Years Presently Posted And Working As Head Master, Middle School, Dhourabhantha, Tahsil Tamnar, District : Raigarh, Chhattisgarh. --- Petitioner(s) versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Secretary, Department Of School Education, Mahanadi Mantralaya, Naya Raipur, Atal Nagar, Post Office And Police Station Naya Raipur, District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh. 2 - Secretary, Department Of Scheduled Caste/ Scheduled Tribe Development, Mahanadi Mantralaya, Naya Raipur, Atal Nagar, Post Office And Police Station Naya Raipur, District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh. 3 - Director, Directorate Of Public Instructions, Chhattisgarh, Indrawati Bhawan, Naya Raipur, Atal Nagar, Post Office And Police Station Naya RAGHVENDRA JAT Digitally signed by RAGHVENDRA JAT 2 Raipur, District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh. 4 - Commissioner, Department Of Scheduled Caste/ Scheduled Tribe, Development, Chhattisgarh, Raipur, Chhattisgarh. 5 - District Education Officer, Raigarh, Chhattisgarh. 6 - Elmenda Bada, Head Master, Government Middle School, Bazar Para, Raigarh, District : Raigarh, Chhattisgarh. --- Respondent(s) WPS No. 2745 of 2023 1 - Suklal Nagbanshi S/o Matwar Sing Aged About 60 Years Presently Posted And Working As Head Master, Middle School Kunjemura, Block Tamnar, District : Raigarh, Chhattisgarh. ---Petitioner(s) Versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Secretary, Department Of School Education, Mahanadi Mantralaya, Naya Raipur, Atal Nagar, Post Office And Police Station Naya Raipur, District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh. 2 - Secretary Department Of Scheduled Caste/scheduled Tribe Development, Mahanadi Mantralaya, Naya Raipur Atal Nagar, Post Office And Police Station Naya Raipur, District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh. 3 3 - Director Directorate Of Public Instructions, Chhattisgarh, Indrawati Bhawan, Naya Raipur Atal Nagar Post Office And Police Station Naya Raipur, District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh. 4 - Commissioner Department Of Scheduled Caste/scheduled Tribe Development Raipur, District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh. 5 - District Education Officer Raigarh, District : Raigarh, Chhattisgarh. 6 - Elmenda Bada Head Master, Government Middle School Bazar Para Raigarh, District : Raigarh, Chhattisgarh. --- Respondent(s) For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Anuroop Panda, Advocate. For Respondent(s)/State : Mr. Ankur Kashyap, Dy. G.A. Hon’ble Mr. Justice Amitendra Kishore Prasad Order on Board 08/10/2025 1. Since common question of facts and law is involved in both the cases, as such, both the petitions are being disposed of by this common order. 2. The petitioners have prayed for certain reliefs in the writ petitions. Though there are some sort of differences in respect of prayer made by the petitioners in all the petitions, however, in sum and substance, the reliefs are altogether similar and identical. The reliefs prayed in WPC No. 2722/2023 (Chyawan Prasad Gupta vs. State of Chhattisgarh & Ors.) are quoted hereinbelow in 4 order to consider these cases and to decide the same. “i. That, this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to direct the respondent authorities to correct the gradation list dated 23/3/2023 as on 1/4/2021 and place the name of the petitioner at an appropriate place by giving proper seniority to the petitioner. ii. Cost of the petition may also be granted to the petitioner. iii. Any other relief, which this Hon'ble Court deems fit and proper, may also kindly be granted to the petitioner, in the interest of justice.” 3. Brief facts of the case, is that, the petitioner is currently posted and working as Head Master of Middle School, Dhourabhantha, Tahsil Tamnar, District Raigarh. Initially appointed as an Assistant Teacher on January 17, 1983, the petitioner was entitled to promotion to the next higher post of Upper Division Teacher (UDT) after completing 12 years of service in 1995. Although the petitioner did not receive the promotion at that time, a higher pay scale was granted based on the recommendation of the Departmental Promotion Committee (DPC). The petitioner was eventually promoted to UDT on May 21, 2007, and after completing 24 years of service, was granted the higher pay scale equivalent to the post of Head Master in 2007. However, the 5 formal promotion to Head Master was delayed and only granted on August 28, 2010. While promotions and seniority up to the post of Head Master were managed at the district level, the post of Principal, the next higher promotion, was handled at the state level. The petitioner’s seniority has been adversely affected because some juniors, appointed later or promoted earlier, appear above him in the seniority list, such as respondent No.6, who was appointed in 1988 but promoted as Head Master in 2000. Despite the petitioner’s actual entitlement to seniority from 2007, he was promoted much later, causing discrimination and depriving him of timely promotion to Principal. This anomaly and delayed promotion violate Article 14 of the Constitution of India. Even in the most recent gradation list dated March 23, 2023, several juniors are placed above the petitioner, who is at serial number 852. The petitioner submitted a representation on March 29, 2023, seeking correction of the gradation list, which remains pending, prompting this petition challenging the discriminatory actions of the authorities. 4. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the petitioners have already preferred a detailed representation before the competent authority seeking correction of the gradation list. It is contended that the petitioner’s position in the said gradation list has been erroneously shown, and such an error, if not rectified at 6 the earliest, would seriously prejudice and adversely affect the entire future service career of the petitioners, including them prospects of promotion, seniority, and other consequential benefits. Therefore, the petitioners prays that necessary correction in the gradation list be carried out in a just and proper manner in order to secure his rightful place in the service hierarchy. 5. On the other hand, learned counsel appearing for the State submits that in the event the petitioners have already filed any representation before the competent authority, the same shall be duly considered and decided by the said authority strictly in accordance with law, within a reasonable time frame, and in adherence to the principles of natural justice. 6. I have heard leaned counsel for the parties and perused the material available on record. 7. Considering the overall facts and circumstances of the present case, and in order to ensure that the matter is not unnecessarily kept pending, it is hereby directed that the concerned respondent authorities shall take up for consideration the representation submitted by the petitioners with regard to the correction of the gradation list, insofar as it relates to the petitioners. The authorities shall duly examine the same in accordance with law and pass a reasoned and appropriate order within a period of 60 7 days from the date of receipt of a certified copy of these orders. 8. It is made clear that this Court has not expressed anything on the merits of the cases. 9. With the aforesaid observation and direction, the writ petitions stands disposed of. Sd/- (Amitendra Kishore Prasad) Judge Raghu Jat