1 2025:CGHC:44930 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPS No. 1008 of 2021 Gendlal Dhimar S/o Shri Satrughan Lal Dhimar, Aged About 32 Years Working As A Constable Batch No. 1425, Now 237, Posted At 15 Bn, Caf, Bijapur, (Dhanora), Dist. Bijapur Chhattisgarh, District : Bijapur, Chhattisgarh ... (s) versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through Its Secretary, Home Dpartment, Mahanadi Bhawan Mantralaya New Raipur, P.S. Rakhi, Distt. Raipur Chhattisgarh, District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh 2 - Director General Of Police Police Headquarter, Raipur, Tehsil And District Raipur Chhattisgarh, District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh 3 - Superintendent Of Police O/o Superintendent Of Police, Dhamtari, District Dhamtari Chhattisgarh, District : Dhamtari, Chhattisgarh ... Respondent(s) For Petitioner : Mr. Chandradeep Prasad, Advocate For State : Ms. Neelima Singh Thakur, Panel Lawyer Hon’ble Shri Justice Rakesh Mohan Pandey Order on Board 03/09/2025 2 1. The petitioner has filed the present writ petition seeking a direction to respondents No.2 and 3 to grant him out-of-turn promotion on the ground that he had participated in a Naxal operation. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner is presently working as a Constable, Batch No.1425, now renumbered as 237, and posted at 15th Battalion, Chhattisgarh Armed Force, Bijapur, Dhanora, District Bijapur. He submits that while the petitioner was serving as a member of the Special Task Force (BREVO), Headquarters Baghera, District Durg, he had received an order from the Superintendent of Police, Headquarters Baghera, directing him to participate in a search operation against Naxalites. Pursuant to it, he proceeded to the Arsikanhar forest along with Constable Dileshwar and 81 other members of the police force. He would further submit that during the said search operation, Naxalites, who were hiding behind a small hill, opened fire at the police party. The police force retaliated in self-defence, as a result of which three female Naxalites and one male Naxalite were neutralised, and weapons and ammunition were recovered from the spot. He would also submit that after successful operation, respondent No.3 prepared a list of members who had participated in the said operation, wherein the petitioner’s name was mentioned at serial number 31. 3 Learned counsel for the petitioner would also submit that when the list for out-of-turn promotions was subsequently published, the petitioner’s name was not considered by respondent No.2. Despite making several representations before the concerned authorities, no heed paid. He would contend that a direction may be issued to respondents No.2 and 3 to consider the claim of the petitioners for out-of-turn promotion in accordance with the Police Regulations 56 & 70 and in the light of the judgment/order passed by the Hon’ble Division Bench in the matter of State of Chhattisgarh vs. Brajesh Kumar Tiwari (Writ Appeal No.214/2025, decided on 28.03.2025). 3. On the other hand, learned counsel appearing for the State would oppose the submissions made by counsel for the petitioner and submits that the claim of the petitioner is to be considered strictly in accordance with the applicable rules and regulations by the competent authority. He would submit that no mandamus for grant of promotion can be issued by this Court; thus, the petition deserves to be dismissed. 4. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the material on record. 5. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, the petitioner is granted liberty to make a representation before respondents No.2 and 3 seeking out-of-turn promotion in accordance with the Police 4 Regulations 56 & 70 and in turn, the authorities concerned are directed to consider and decide the said representation strictly in accordance with law keeping in mind the judgments/orders passed in similar cases, including the judgment rendered by the Hon’ble Division Bench in the matter of Brajesh Kumar Tiwari (supra). 6. The decision on such representation shall be taken by the competent authority within a period of 90 days from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order. 7. With the aforesaid observation(s) and direction(s), the writ petition stands disposed of. Sd/- Rakesh Mohan Pandey JUDGE Nadim