1 / 4 2026:CGHC:6410 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPS No. 985 of 2026 Anita Kaushal W/o Ajay Kaushal Aged About 56 Years Occupation- Teacher (L.B.), Government Middle School Maahud A, Sankul- Mohandipath, Block- Gunderdehi, District- Balod, (C.G.) ... Petitioner versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through Secretary, Department Of School Education, Mantralaya, Mahanadi Bhawan, Atal Nagar Nawa Raipur, District- Raipur (C.G.) 2 - The Public Education Directorate Through Director First Floor C Block, Indrawati Bhawan, Atal Nagar, Raipur (C.G.) 3 - Joint Director Education Durg Division, In Front Of District Panchayat Office, G.E. Road, District- Durg (C.G.) 4 - Bhama Deshmukh Aged About 43 Years Occupation- Teacher (L.B.), Government Middle School Sankri, Balod District- Balod (C.G.) ... Respondents For Petitioner : Ms. Hamida Siddiqui, Advocate For State : Ms. Shailja Shukla, Govt. Advocate S.B.: Hon'ble Shri Parth Prateem Sahu, Judge Order on Board ALFIZA BAIG Digitally signed by ALFIZA BAIG Date: 2026.02.06 10:46:02 +0530 2 / 4 05.02.2026 1. Petitioner has filed this writ petition seeking following reliefs:- “10.1 That, this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to quash and set aside the impugned promotion order dated 26/12/2025 issued by respondent no. 2, and also in the light of the recruitment rule 2019 petitioner's case of promotion be considered, taken their initial date of joining. 10.2 That, Issue a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order, or direction commanding the respondents to correct the petitioner's initial date of joining from 23/10/2008 to 21/10/2008 in all Gradation Lists, including the State level gradation list dated 02/06/2023 and the Final Gradation list dated 06/11/2024. And refix the seniority of the petitioner above Respondent no. 4 and all similarly placed juniors in accordance with her correct date of joining. 10.3 Respondent no. 1 & 2 be directed to correct the gradation list dated 06/11/2024 or prepare and finalize the gradation list afresh strictly on the basis of seniority determined from the initial date of appointment, and in cases of same date of appointment, strictly on the basis of date of birth, after granting opportunity of objection/hearing to the petitioner. 10.4 That, Respondent no. 1 & 2 be directed to consider the case of the petitioner for promotion to the post of Lecturer (Biology) with effect from the date Respondent No. 4 was promoted, by placing her in the correct position in the seniority list, in accordance with law and grant her promotion in the same DPC convened for promotion order dated 26.12.2025 or review DPC be convened and petitioner be granted promotion. 10.5 That, the record of the DPC convened in relation to the promotion order dated 26.12.2025 be called. 10.6 That this Hon’ble Court may further be pleased to grant such other relief(s) as may be deemed fit and proper in the interest of justice and fair play.” 2. Learned counsel for petitioner submits that petitioner is holding the post of Teacher (L.B.). Petitioner has joined the post after her appointment on 21.10.2008, accordingly, petitioner was earlier placed at proper 3 / 4 place in gradation list and also in gradation list prepared at District Level on 01.06.2023 however, subsequently, when the gradation list was prepared State wise, by typographical error date of joining of the petitioner has been erroneously placed much below in the gradation list by which her seniority is affected. Only because of wrong placement in gradation list, showing her seniority below she was not considered for promotion and junior to petitioner have been promoted against which petitioner has submitted representation before respondent no. 2 which is pending consideration and therefore direction be issued to respondent no. 2 to consider and take decision at the earliest within specified time frame. She also submits that in the facts of the case, petitioner may be permitted to submit fresh representation raising all the grounds as raised in this writ petition and concerned respondent be directed to consider her fresh representation also at the time of considering her pending representation. 3. Learned counsel for State submits that in view of limited prayer made by learned counsel for petitioner, she is having no objection. 4. On due consideration of submission made by learned counsel for the respective parties and particularly considering the nature of grievances raised in this writ petition with regard to some typographical error while preparing the gradation list, instead of keeping this writ petition pending and seeking reply from respondent authorities, I find it appropriate to dispose of this writ petition at this stage, permitting petitioner to submit fresh comprehensive representation before respondent no. 2 and 3 and if such representation is submitted concerned authorities shall consider and take decision on the representation to be submitted by 4 / 4 petitioner along with the pending representation in accordance with law, expeditiously, preferably within a period of 02 months from the date of receipt of this Order. 5. Upon considering the representation to be submitted by petitioner, if the authorities found that the claim of petitioner is correct then appropriate steps be taken for considering the candidature of petitioner for promotion in accordance with law. 6. With the aforesaid observation and direction, this writ petition stands disposed of. Certified copy as per rules. sd/- (Parth Prateem Sahu) Judge Alfiza