1 2026:CGHC:455 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR Writ Petition (S) No. 1229 of 2019 Miss Priya Markam D/o Shri R.P. Markam Aged About 28 Years R/o House No. Tds /07 Near Maheshwari Bhawan Kewramunda Jagdalpur District Bastar Chhattisgarh., District : Bastar(Jagdalpur), Chhattisgarh ... Petitioner versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through Secretary, Panchayat And Gramin Department Mantralaya, Naya Raipur, P.S. Rakhi, District Raipur Chhattisgarh., District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh 2 - The Collector Bastar Jagdalpur, Office At Jagdalpur District Bastar Chhattisgarh., District : Bastar(Jagdalpur), Chhattisgarh 3 - Chief Executive Office District Panchayat Batar Jagdalpur, District Bastar Chhattisgarh., District : Bastar(Jagdalpur), Chhattisgarh 4 - Chief Executive Office Janpad Panchayat Bastar District Bastar Chhattisgarh., District : Bastar(Jagdalpur), Chhattisgarh HARNEET KAUR Digitally signed by HARNEET KAUR Date: 2026.01.06 10:45:26 +0530 HARNEET KAUR Digitally signed by HARNEET KAUR Date: 2026.01.06 10:45:41 +0530 2 5 - Miss Tarika Shori D/o Motilal Shori R/o Near Vinod Servicing Hikamipara Jagdalpur District Bastar Chhattisgarh., District : Bastar(Jagdalpur), Chhattisgarh ... Respondent(s) For Petitioner : Mr. K.K. Baharani on behalf of Mr. P.K. Tulsyan, Advocates For Respondents 1 & 2 /State : Mr. Sharad Mishra, P.L. For Respondents 3 & 4 : Mr. C. Jayant K. Rao, Advocate SB- Hon'ble Shri Justice Sanjay K. Agrawal Order On Board 05.01.2026 1. The petitioner herein was working as an Assistant Programmer on contractual basis at Janpad Panchayat, Jagdalpur and she was transferred to Janpad Panchayat Bastar on 22/01/2018 (Annexure P/3) for which she was granted extension upto 05/10/2018, however, thereafter her service was not further extended for which she made a representation on 08/10/2018 (Annexure P/6) and filed the instant writ petition before this Court seeking quashment of order dated 05/10/2018 (Annexure P/1). 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that her service ought to have been extended pursuant to the 3 representation dated 08/10/2018 (Annexure P/6) filed by her, which has arbitrarily not been extended. 3. Learned counsel for the respondents would support the impugned order and oppose the submission made by learned counsel for the petitioner. 4. I have heard learned counsel for the parties, considered their submissions made herein-above and went through the records with utmost circumspection. 5. A careful perusal of the record would show that petitioner’s tenure came to end on 05/10/2018 and thereafter, it has not been extended though she has claimed for extension by way of representation dated 08/10/2018. Extension cannot be claimed as a matter of right and therefore, no writ can issued to the respondents directing them to extend the tenure of the petitioner. Moreover, the representation was filed by the petitioner on 08/10/2018 and six years have passed since then and pursuant to the advertisement issued for the post of Assistant Programmer on 14/06/2018, respondent No. 5 has been selected and appointed on the said post. Thus, I do not find any merit in this writ petition. 4 6. Accordingly, this writ petition, being devoid of merits, is dismissed in limine without notice to the other side. No cost(s). Sd/- (Sanjay K. Agrawal) Judge Harneet