1 / 2 2026:CGHC:2685 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPS No. 464 of 2026 • Bhupendra Dadsena S/o Late Deo Singh Dadsena, Aged About 40 Years R/o Mahaveer Park, Mahasamund, District- Mahasamund (C.G.) Presently Posted And Working As Head Constable P.S. Tendukona District- Mahasamund (C.G.) ... Petitioner versus 1. State of Chhattisgarh through The Secretary, Home Affairs Department, Naya Raipur, Atal Nagar, District- Raipur (C.G.) 2. Inspector General of Police, The IG Raipur Range Shankar Nagar, Raipur Chhattisgarh- 492018 3. Superintendent Of Police Mahasamund, City District - Mahasamund Chhattisgarh 4. Mahesh Ram Dahariya Posted As Assistant Sub Inspector Police, Mahasamund, District- Mahasamund (C.G.) ... Respondents For Petitioner : Mr. Anuroop Panda, Advocate For Respondent-State : Mr. Aditya Tiwari, Panel Lawyer Hon'ble Shri Parth Prateem Sahu, Judge ORDER ON BOARD 16/01/2026 1. Petitioner has filed this writ petition seeking following reliefs. “10.1 To kindly direct respondent No. 2 to take decision on petitioner’s representation dated 09.12.2025 (Annexure P-10) and direct the respondent authority to consider and pass appropriate order granting petitioner the rightful promotion and seniority and all consequential benefits. 10.2 Any other relief may be granted to the petitioner, which this Hon’ble Court may deem fit in the present fact and circumstances of the case including the cost of the petition.” PAWAN KUMAR JHA Digitally signed by PAWAN KUMAR JHA 2 / 2 2. Learned counsel for petitioner submits that petitioner is holding post of Head Constable (A) category and was due for promotion on the post of Assistant Sub-Inspector. Respondents-authorities while considering the candidature of the Head Constables though has also considered name of petitioner, however, while issuing order of promotion name of petitioner was not mentioned and he was not promoted. Aggrieved with which, petitioner submitted a representation before the concerned authority vide Annexure P- 10 dated 09.12.2025 on the ground of correction of gradation list, fixation of seniority of petitioner in gradation list and to promote the petitioner, however, till date representation submitted by petitioner is not considered and decided. Therefore, direction be issued to Respondent no. 2 to take decision on the representation of petitioner at the earliest. 3. Learned State counsel submits that as the petitioner is only seeking direction to Respondent No. 2 to decide his pending representation, he is having no objection to the limited prayer made by learned counsel for petitioner. 4. On due consideration of the submission made by learned counsel for the parties, in particular pleadings made in writ petition that due to wrong fixation of seniority of petitioner in gradation list erroneously he could not promoted against which petitioner submitted representation, I find it appropriate to dispose of this writ petition with a direction to Respondent No. 2 to take decision on the representation of petitioner, in accordance with law, expeditiously, preferably within a further period of 04 weeks from the date of receipt of copy of order passed by this Court. 5. Petitioner will be at liberty to file fresh representation if he so desires along with copy of order to be placed before Respondent No. 2 and if such a representation is submitted the said representation shall also be considered in view of observation made above. 6. With the aforesaid observation and direction, this writ petition is disposed of. Sd/- (Parth Prateem Sahu) pwn JUDGE