1 2025:CGHC:43416 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPS No. 973 of 2022 1 - Dakeshwar Prasad Verma S/o Santosh Verma Aged About 52 Years Occupation Assistant Teacher (L.B.) Posted At Government Navin Primary School Gurra , Block Bhatapara, Police Station Bhatapara Gramin , District Baloda Bazar Bhatapara Chhattisgarh, R/o Professor Colony, Sector 1, Road No. 3, House No. 169/2, Raipur , District Raipur Chhattisgarh. ... Petitioner(s) versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Secretary, Education Department Mantralaya , Mahanadi Bhawan , Atal Nagar , Nava Raipur , District Raipur Chhattisgarh. 2 - Director Lok Shikshan State Of Chhattisgarh , Indrawati Bhawan, Raipur , District Raipur Chhattisgarh. 3 - Joint Director Lok Shikshan, Division Indrawati Bhawan Raipur , District Raipur Chhattisgarh. 4 - The Commissioner Lok Shikshan, Directorate , Indravati Bhawan , Nava Raipur , District Raipur Chhattisgarh. 5 - Collector Baloda Bazar , District Baloda Bazar Bhatapara Chhattisgarh. 6 - District Education Officer Baloda Bazar , District Baloda Bazar Bhatapara Chhattisgarh. ... Respondent(s) NIRMALA RAO 2 For Petitioner : Shri Utkarsh Patel, Advocate holding the brief of Shri Pushpendra Kumar Patel, Advocate. For Respondent/ State : Shri Raj Kumar Gupta, Addl. A.G. Hon'ble Shri Justice Rakesh Mohan Pandey Order on Board 26.08.2025 1. The petitioner has filed this petition seeking the following reliefs:- “10.1 That, this Hon'ble Court, may kindly call for the entire record in relates to the case of the petitioner. 10.2 That, this Hon'ble Court, may kindly be pleased to issued a writ / or writs / order / or orders / to direct the respondent' authorities, to determine the seniority of the petitioner from the date of initial appointment dated 10.09.1998, by set-aside the memo dated 15.01.2022, in relating to the petitioner grievances is concern, by preparing the fresh seniority list, in the ends of justice. 10.3 That, any other relief, this Hon'ble Court, deem fit and proper may also kindly be granted to the petitioner, in the interest of justice.” 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the seniority of the petitioner is being reckoned from 1.7.2018 i.e. the date of absorption, whereas he was appointed to the post of Assistant Teacher (Panchayat) vide order dated 10.9.1998. He would contend that a direction may be issued to the respondent authorities to consider the claim of the petitioner. 3. On the other hand, learned counsel for the State would submit that according to the conditions mentioned in the policy for absorption, the 3 seniority of all absorbed employees is maintained from 1.7.2018. He would contend that the act of the respondents is not discriminatory and therefore, the petition deserves to be dismissed. 4. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the documents present on the record. 5. A perusal of the gradation list would show that the petitioner and other similarly situated teachers have been granted seniority from 1.7.2018. Thus, it is not a case of discrimination or arbitrariness, therefore, no case is made out for interference. 6. Accordingly, this petition is dismissed. However, the petitioner would be at liberty to make a representation. Sd/- (Rakesh Mohan Pandey) Judge Nimmi