1 2025:CGHC:55473 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPS No. 2849 of 2023 Charan Singh Churendra S/o Harish Chandra Churendra Aged About 32 Years R/o House No. 71, Shikaritola Road, Kusumkasa Dondi District Balod, Chhattisgarh PIN-491228. ... Petitioner versus 1 - State of Chhattisgarh Through The Secretary, School Education Department, Mahanadi Bhawan, Atal Nagar, Nawa Raipur, District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh 2 - Director Directorate of Public Education, First Floor, Indravati Bhawan, Nawa Raipur Atal Nagar, District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh 3 - Joint Director, Education Division, Durg, Chhattisgarh 4 - District Education Officer Balod, District : Balod, Chhattisgarh 5 - Block Education Officer Dondi, District : Balod, Chhattisgarh ... Respondents (Cause-title taken from Case Information System) For Petitioner : Mr. Rudranath Mukherjee, Advocate For State/Respondents : Mr. Dashrath Prajapati, Panel Lawyer Hon’ble Shri Amitendra Kishore Prasad, Judge Order on Board 13.11.2025 1. The instant writ petition is preferred by the petitioner with the following relief(s):- YOGESH TIWARI Digitally signed by YOGESH TIWARI Date: 2025.11.14 10:50:53 +0530 2 “10.1 This Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to direct the respondent authorities to consider the petitioner for promotion. 10.2 This Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to direct the respondent authorities to decide the pending representation of the petitioner within stipulated time. 10.3 Any appropriate writ, direction or order may also kindly be passed in favour of the petitioners, which this Hon'ble Court deems fit in the circumstances of the case.” 2. At the very outset, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the grievance of the petitioner is that he has not been considered for promotion from the post of Assistant Teacher (L.B.) to the post of Teacher (E-cadre) for the subject English, despite being fully eligible and having fulfilled all requisite conditions prescribed under the relevant rules and circulars governing such promotion. It has been further submitted that in the initial gradation list, the name of the petitioner was shown at Serial No. 500 under the subject English; however, in the final promotion list dated 06.04.2023, the said position has been occupied by one Abhishek Kumar Pandey, which is arbitrary, unjustified, and contrary to law. 3. It has been further submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner has already submitted a detailed representation before the competent authority seeking redressal of his grievance, but the same is still pending consideration. It is also brought to the 3 notice of this Court that several posts of Upper Division Teacher (English) are still lying vacant in the same area, yet the petitioner’s legitimate claim for promotion has not been considered till date. It is, therefore, prayed that the respondents be directed to consider and decide the petitioner’s pending representation in accordance with law and, if found eligible, to extend the benefit of promotion to the post of Upper Division Teacher (English) from the due date, with all consequential benefits. 4. On the other hand, the learned State counsel submits that the writ petition is not maintainable for non-joinder of necessary parties, as the petitioner has challenged the promotion order dated 06.04.2023 without impleading those employees who have already been promoted pursuant thereto. On merits, it is submitted that the petitioner was transferred on his own request from District Kabirdham to District Balod, and as per settled law, an employee so transferred loses his previous district seniority and is placed at the bottom of the seniority list in the transferee district. The DPC considered cases up to seniority as on 01.01.2020, whereas the petitioner joined in Balod on 09.02.2022; hence, his case was not within the zone of consideration. It has been submitted that the respondents have acted strictly in accordance with the applicable rules and Government instructions, and there is no illegality or irregularity in the promotion process. The petitioner has no vested right to promotion, only a right to consideration, which was duly 4 afforded. Accordingly, the petition being devoid of merit and substance, deserves to be dismissed at the threshold. 5. I have heard learned counsel appearing for the parties and perused the material available with the writ petition. 6. Having considered the overall facts and circumstances of the case and upon perusal of the documents placed on record, this Court finds that the grievance of the petitioner primarily relates to his non-consideration for promotion from the post of Assistant Teacher (L.B.) to the post of Teacher (E-cadre) for the subject English, despite his name having been reflected at Serial No. 500 in the initial gradation list, and the same position having been subsequently shown in the name of another individual, namely Abhishek Kumar Pandey, in the final promotion list dated 06.04.2023. 7. This Court is of the considered view that the issue raised by the petitioner involves an administrative determination as to his placement in the gradation list and his eligibility for consideration in the promotion process. Such factual aspects are required to be examined and clarified by the competent authority, based on the service records and the relevant promotion guidelines. Therefore, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the rival submissions and without commenting upon the validity of the promotion list dated 06.04.2023, the present writ petition is disposed of with the following directions:- 5 • The petitioner is granted liberty to submit a fresh and comprehensive representation before the competent respondent authority within a period of two weeks from today, specifically setting out all his grievances and enclosing relevant documents, including his claim that his name was reflected at Serial No. 500 in the initial gradation list for English subject, but was omitted in the final promotion list dated 06.04.2023. • Upon receipt of the petitioner’s representation along with a certified copy of this order, the respondent authorities shall objectively consider and decide the same in accordance with law. While doing so, the concerned authority shall specifically record reasons as to why the petitioner has not been placed at Serial No. 500 in the final promotion list dated 06.04.2023 and whether he was otherwise eligible and entitled for consideration in the said promotion process. • The entire exercise shall be completed and a reasoned and speaking order shall be passed by the competent authority within a period of 45 days from the date of receipt of the petitioner’s representation along with a certified copy of this order. The decision so taken shall also be communicated to the petitioner forthwith. • It is made clear that this Court has not adjudicated upon the inter se merit, seniority, or eligibility of the petitioner vis-à-vis 6 other candidates, and all issues on facts and law are left open to be decided by the competent authority in accordance with the applicable rules, circulars, and policy guidelines. 8. With the aforesaid observations and directions, the writ petition stands disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs. Sd/- (Amitendra Kishore Prasad) Judge Yogesh