1 2026:CGHC:5195 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPS No. 1166 of 2026 1. Suresh Kumar Sidar S/o Late Nathu Ram Sidar Aged About 63 Years Retired Lecturer, Govt. Higher Secondary School Patrapali, Village- Patrapali Khurd, Post Office- Rajga, Tahsil Sakti, District Sakti (C.G.) ... Petitioner versus 1. State of Chhattisgarh Through Secretary, School Education Department, Mantralaya, Mahanadi Bhawan, Nava Raipur, Atal Nagar, District Raipur (C.G.) 2. Director Directorate Of Public Instructions, Indrawati Bhawan, Nava Raipur, Atal Nagar, District Raipur (C.G.) ... Respondents For Petitioner : Mr. Kaushal Yadav, Advocate For Respondents : Mr. Vinay Pandey, Dy. Advocate General Hon'ble Mr. Justice Parth Prateem Sahu Order On Board 30/01/2026 1. Learned counsel for petitioner submits that petitioner while holding the post of Lecturer was promoted to the post of Principal vide order dated 30.04.2025. The order of promotion was put to challenge in a writ petition where the petitioners SYED ROSHAN ZAMIR ALI Digitally signed by SYED ROSHAN ZAMIR ALI Date: 2026.01.30 18:38:48 +0530 2 therein succeeded in getting interim order and thereafter petitioner herein was not permitted to join on the promotional post. In the meanwhile, petitioner stood retire from service on 30.6.2025. Respondents authorities have not calculated retiral dues according to the promotional post, for which petitioner has already submitted representation before Respondent No. 1 on 28.10.2025, which is pending consideration. He submits that as representation of petitioner is still pending before the appropriate authority, direction be issued to Respondent No.1 to take decision on representation at the earliest within specified time frame. 2. Learned State counsel submits that as the petitioner is not pressing this writ petition on merits and only seeking direction to Respondent No.1 to take decision on the representation, he is having no objection to the limited prayer. 3. On due consideration of the submission made by learned counsel for the respective parties, nature of grievance raised and further that petitioner has already submitted representation before Respondent no.1 for redressal of his grievance, instead of keeping this writ petition pending seeking reply from the respondents, I find it appropriate to dispose of this writ petition at this stage is directing Respondent No.1 to take decision on the pending representation of petitioner, in accordance with law, 3 expeditiously, preferably within a further period of 02 months from the date of receipt of copy of order passed by this Court. 4. Petitioner will be at liberty to submit fresh representation before the appropriate authority, if he so desires and if petitioner submits fresh representation along with copy of order passed by this Court, Respondent No. 1 shall also consider and take decision on the same in terms of observation made above. 5. Accordingly, this petition is disposed of with aforesaid observations and directions. Sd/- (Parth Prateem Sahu) Judge roshan/-