1 2026:CGHC:3107 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPS No. 548 of 2026 1 - Dushyant Kumar Kashyap S/o Shri Balram Prasad Aged About 49 Years Working As Peon In The Municipal Corporation, Bilaspur, Tah. And Distt. Bilaspur (C.G.) --- Petitioner(s) versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through Secretary, Nagariya Prashan Awam Vikas Vibhag, Mahanadi Bhavan, Mantralay, New Raipur, Distt. Raipur (C.G.) 2 - The Director Nagariya Prashashan Awam Vikas Vibhag, Mahanadi Bhavan, Mantralay, New Raipur, Distt. Raipur (C.G.) 3 - The Municipal Corporation Bilaspur Through, Its Commissioner, Bilaspur Distt. Bilaspur (C.G.) 4 - Manoj Kumar Khande Assistant Revenue Inspector, Municipal Corporation, Bilaspur, Tah. And Distt. Bilaspur (C.G.) 5 - Rakesh Prasad Sahu Assistant Revenue Inspector, Municipal Corporation, Bilaspur, Tah. And Distt. Bilaspur (C.G.) 6 - Amit Kumar Kori Assistant Revenue Inspector, Municipal Corporation, Bilaspur, Tah. And Distt. Bilaspur (C.G.) 7 - Shahanwaj Hussain Shiekh Assistant Revenue Inspector, Municipal Corporation, Bilaspur, Tah. And Distt. Bilaspur (C.G.) --- Respondent(s) BALRAM PRASAD DEWANGAN Digitally signed by BALRAM PRASAD DEWANGAN 2 (The Cause title is taken from CIS system) For Petitioner : Mr. M.K. Sinha, Advocate For State/Respondents No.1 and 2 : Ms. Akanksha Verma Dabhadekar, Panel Lawyer For Respondent No.3 : Mr. S.S. Baghel, Advocate S.B.: Hon'ble Shri Parth Prateem Sahu, Judge Order on Board 19/01/2026 1. Learned counsel for petitioner submits that petitioner was appointed on the post of Peon vide order dated 20.05.2016. After completion of relevant period of service, petitioner became eligible for promotion however, due to supersession of petitioner by his junior, he could not be promoted. Petitioner submitted representation before respondent No.3 on 12.02.2025 and 08.12.2025, however, till date, no decision has been taken on the claim of petitioner, therefore, a direction be issued to respondents No.3 to take decision on the representation submitted by the petitioner at the earliest. 2. Learned counsel for respondent No.3 submits that petitioner is not pressing this petition on merits and is only seeking a direction to consider and take decision on the representation submitted by petitioner, therefore, he is having no objection. 3. On due consideration on the submission of learned counsel for respective parties without entering into merits of the claim of petitioner and further considering that representation is already submitted by petitioner before the competent authority, this writ petition at this stage 3 is disposed of directing respondent No.3 to take decision on the pending representation submitted by petitioner in accordance with law expeditiously preferably within further period of two months from the date of receipt of this order. 4. With the aforesaid observations and directions, this petition stands disposed of. sd/- (Parth Prateem Sahu) Judge Balram