1 2026:CGHC:2333 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPS No. 61 of 2026 1 - Savita Dewangan W/o Rajendra Kumar Garhwal Aged About 60 Years R/o House No. 37, Shrishti Garden Telibanda Raipur District- Raipur (C.G.) ... Petitioner Versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Secretary, Department Of School Education Mahanadi Bhawan, Mantralaya, Atal Nagar, District- Raipur (C.G.) 2 - Under Secretary Department Of School Education, Mahanadi Bhawan, Mantralaya, Atal Nagar, District- Raipur C.G. 3 - Director Directorate Of Public Instruction Indrawati Bhawan Atal Nagar, C.G. District- Raipur C.G. 4 - Managing Director Samagra Shiksha, Chhattisgarh, Government Indrawati Bhawan, Atal Nagar, District- Raipur C.G. ... Respondents For Petitioner : Mr. Shobit Koshta, Advocate For Respondents No. 1 to 3/State : Mr. Santosh Bharat, Panel Lawyer For Respondent No. 4. : Mr. Animesh Tiwari, Advocate SB: Hon'ble Shri Parth Prateem Sahu, Judge ORDER ON BOARD 14/0 1/2026 1. The petitioner has filed this writ petition seeking following reliefs:- “10.1 That, the Hon’ble Court may kindly be pleased to issue appropriate writ and grant the petitioner full salary from July, 2022 to August, 2024, arrears of 7th Pay Commission and annual increment due since July, 2022 and for consideration of period from July, 2 2022 to August, 2024 as service period qua the petitioner service and may also direct the respondents to consider the petitioner representation within such outer limit as the Hon’ble Court may deem fit in the light of the facts and circumstances of the case. 10.2 That, this Hon’ble Court may kindly be pleased to call for the entire records of the selection process for kind perusal of this Hon’ble Court. 10.3 Any other relief which this Hon’ble Court deem fit and proper may also kindly be granted to the petitioner in the interest of justice along with the cost of the petition to the petitioner.” 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that pursuant to the order dated 28.04.2023 (Annexure P/2) passed by this Court in WP (S) No. 5620/2022, petitioner was reinstated in service. However, the monetary claim which was claimed by the petitioner has not been decided, against which, petitioner has submitted representation to the Respondent No. 3 on 18.11.2024, however, till date no decision has been taken and therefore, direction be issued to the Respondent No. 3 to take decision on the pending representation of the petitioner at the earliest. 3. On the other hand, learned counsel for the Respondents/State submits that as the petitioner is not pressing this writ petition on merits and is only seeking a direction to the respondents, to take decision on the representation, he is having no objection in view of the limited prayer made by the counsel for the petitioner. If the representation is pending consideration, it will be considered and decided in accordance with law. 4. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the documents placed on record. 5. On due consideration of the submission of counsel for the respective parties, facts and circumstances of the case, nature of grievance raised by the petitioner, without entering into the merits of the case, this writ petition at this stage is disposed of directing the Respondent No. 3 to consider and take decision on the pending representation submitted by 3 the petitioner in accordance with law expeditiously, preferably within a further period of 03 months from the date of receipt of the order. 6. With the aforesaid observation and direction, this writ petition stands disposed of. Sd/- (Parth Prateem Sahu) Judge Dey SHUBHAM DEY Digitally signed by SHUBHAM DEY Date: 2026.01.19 11:49:31 +0530