1 2026:CGHC:5500 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPS No. 3021 of 2023 1 - Rupesh Kumar Rajput S/o Human Singh Rajput Aged About 36 Years Assistant Teacher, (Lb) Government Primary School Gunapur Block Lormi Tahsil Lormi, District : Mungeli, Chhattisgarh. 2 - Smt. Durga Netam W/o Rohit Kumar Netam Aged About 37 Years Assistant Teacher, (Lb) Government Primary School Ghanaghat Block Lormi Tahsil Lormi, District : Mungeli, Chhattisgarh. 3 - Ravi Prasad Lahare S/o R.D. Lahare Aged About 38 Years Assistant Teacher, (Lb) Government Primary School Ghanaghat Block Lormi Tahsil Lormi, District : Mungeli, Chhattisgarh. 4 - Mahaveer Singh Rajput S/o Ram Swaroop Singh Rajput Aged About 37 Years Assistant Teacher, (Lb) Government Primary School Bhandhwa Block Lormi Tahsil Lormi, District : Mungeli, Chhattisgarh. 5 - Smt. Kalyani Dhruw S/o Kawal Ram Dhruw Aged About 39 Years Assistant Teacher, (Lb) Government Primary School Semariya Block Lormi Tahsil Lormi, District : Mungeli, Chhattisgarh. 6 - Dharmesh Singh Jaiswal S/o Shri Manik Lal Jaiswal Aged About 41 Years Assistant Teacher, (Lb) Government Primary School Ramanagar Block Lormi Tahsil Lormi, District : Mungeli, Chhattisgarh. AVINASH SHARMA Digitally signed by AVINASH SHARMA Date: 2026.02.04 17:03:25 +0530 2 7 - Pushkar Singh Rajput S/o Shri Toran Singh Rajput Aged About 36 Years Assistant Teacher, (Lb) Government Primary School Vijrakapakala Block Lormi Tahsil Lormi, District : Mungeli, Chhattisgarh. 8 - Ram Prakash Singh Rajput S/o Shri Govind Singh Rajput Aged About 37 Years Assistant Teacher, (Lb) Government Primary School Vijrakapa Block Lormi Tahsil Lormi, District : Mungeli, Chhattisgarh. 9 - Smt. Hareshwari Sendre W/o Shri Bhoj Kurre Aged About 45 Years Assistant Teacher, (Lb) Government Primary School Nayagaon Thelka Block Lormi Tahsil Lormi, District : Mungeli, Chhattisgarh. ... Petitioners. versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through Secretary Department Of School Education Mantralaya, Mahanadi Bhawan, Atal Nagar Raipur, District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh. 2 - Director Public Education Directorate, Indravati Bhawan, Nawa Raipur, District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh. 3 - Collector Mungeli Department Of School Eduation, District : Mungeli, Chhattisgarh. 4 - District Education Officer Mungeli, District : Mungeli, Chhattisgarh. 5 - Block Education Officer Lormi, District : Mungeli, Chhattisgarh. ... Respondents. For Petitioners : Shri KPS Gandhi, Advocate. For State/Respondents : Shri Arpit Agrawal, PL. Hon’ble Mr. Justice Amitendra Kishore Prasad Order on Board 3 31/01/2026 1. The petitioners by way of this petition are challenging the order dated 10.03.2023 issued by the District Education Officer, District Mungeli C.G. by which, their claim for seniority from the date of initial appointment has been rejected by the DEO stating that seniority of the petitioners will be reckoned from the date of joining the duty in the transferred place. The reliefs as prayed for by the petitioners are as under:- (1) That this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to issue a mandamus writ/order/or direction to the respondents authorities to consider the promotion of the petitioner on the post of Head Master and passed the order be set aside the impugned order dated 10.03.2023 (Annexure P/1). (2) That this Hon'ble Court kindly pleased to declare the clause 9 of the circulars dated 06.07.2018 (Annexure P/9) is to be contrary to the rule 12(2) (c) of the Chhattisgarh civil services (recruitment and condition) Rules 1961 and as ab-inito. (3) Any other relief may also be granted in the favour petitioner as may deem fit by this Hon'ble Court as per the facts and circumstances of the case. 4 2. Facts of the case as projected by the petitioners is like that petitioners were initially appointed on the post of Shiksha Karmi Grade III in the year 2005 and 2006 under Panchayat Department of different Janpad Panchayats. Thereafter, they have been posted in the different schools of Block Lormi, District Mungeli after their transfer orders. The date of initial appointment, Transfer dates and their Sr. Nos. in the final gradation are mentioned in the table as under:- S.No. Name of Petitioners Date of initial appointment Transfer date Sr. No. of the gradation 1 Rupesh Kumar Rajput 28.06.2005 03.09.2010 429 2 Smt. Durga Netam 13.07.2006 22.10.2009 524 3 Mahaveer Singh Rajput 13.07.2006 11.09.2012 525 4 Ravi Prasad Lahre 15.06.2005 17.10.2006 319 5 Smt. Kalyani Dhruw 04.06.2005 16.09.2013 237 6 Dharmesh Jaiswal 13.07.2006 28.06.2010 522 7 Pushkar Singh Rajput 13.07.2006 28.06.2010 520 8 Ram Prakash Rajput 13.07.2006 27.07.2009 519 9 Smt. Hareshwari Sendre 01.05.2005 15.10.2010 162 5 3. Further necessary facts are that services of the petitioners have been absorbed to the school Education department on the post of Assistant Teachers (LB) on 10/08/2018. On 10/08/2018 the respondent No. 4 District Education Officer Mungeli issued the absorption order of the petitioners. After absorption of the petitioners in the school Education department, the Respondent No. 4/DEO prepared the gradation list of the Assistant Teacher (LB) as on 01/04/2022. In which the name of the petitioners have rightly been placed at Sr. No.429, 524, 525, 319, 237, 522, 520, 519, 162 respectively. Thereafter, the respondent No 4 issued the promotion orders on dated 10/10/2022 of the Assistant Teacher's (LB) on the post of Head Master. Promotion orders of the Assistant Teachers were separately been issued on 10.10.2022. The respondent No, 4 has illegally and contrary to the Rules in arbitrary manner, not considered the name of the petitioners for promotion on the post of Head master, whereas on the contrary promoted to the juniors of the petitioners and name of the petitioners were placed below their juniors. After issuing the promotion order of the Juniors of the petitioners, the petitioners jointly submitted their representation in the office of the respondent no. 3 and 4. The respondent No. 4 in an arbitrary manner did not take any action on the petitioners application. Thereafter the petitioners filed a Writ Petition (S) No. 1230/2023 before this Hon'ble Court, which has been decided on 13/02/23, 6 the Hon'ble Court passed the order/direction to the respondent no. 4 to decide the petitioners application in accordance with law expeditiously preferably within an outer limit of four week's from the date of receipt of the order. Thereafter, petitioners filed representation before Respondent Nos.3 and 4 for promotion on the post of Head Master from Assistant Teachers stating that their juniors have been promoted on the said post but their name has not been considered for promotion. Vide impugned order, the said representation was rejected stating that according to circular dated 06.07.2018, petitioners’ seniority has been reckoned from the date of assuming charge in the transferred place. Hence this Petition. 4. It is argued by leaned counsel for the petitioners that for the purposes of seniority, initial date of appointment is required to be considered and not the date on which petitioners assumed charges on the transferred place. Learned counsel for the petitioners argued that circular dated 06.07.2018 is not in consonance with Chhattisgarh Civil Services (Recruitment and Conditions) Rules, 1961. He submits that petitioners were earlier appointed on the post of Shiksha Karmi Grade III on regular basis in the year 2005-06 under the panchayat department. Subsequently, they were transferred to Lormi District Mungeli, however, when they were absorped in school education department, instead of date of initial appointment, the date of assuming charge in the transferred place is being considered for 7 seniority stating that according to circular dated 06.07.2018, their seniority will be reckoned from the date when they have assumed charge in the transferred place, which is illegal on the face of record. Learned counsel for the petitioners places reliance on the order passed by this Court in WPS No.2263 of 2021 (Omkar Prasad Verma vs. State of Chhattisgarh and Others and other connected matters), in which, this Court has considered the similar issue and order has been passed to consider the initial date of appointment for seniority in the gradation list and as such, the present matter is identical to that matter, therefore, in light of the said matter, the respondent authorities may be directed to consider the case of the petitioners for promotion from their initial date of appointment. 5. On the other hand, learned State counsel argues that the contention raised by the petitioners are misconceived, their initial date of appointment cannot be taken into consideration as they on their own have chosen to get transferred to the other schools and as such, their seniority cannot be considered from the date of initial appointment as they have left the services of the respective panchayats from where they were appointed. 6. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record available with the petition. 7. From the bare perusal of record, it is quite vivid that so far as claim of the petitioners is concerned, they are seeking relief that their initial date of appointment may be directed to be considered 8 for the purposes of seniority in the gradation list, which the respondent authorities/ DEO is not considering. To redress the said grievance, petitioners filed Writ Petition before this Court bearing No.WPS/1230/ 2023, in which, this Court has directed the respondent authorities to consider the representation of the petitioners and to pass appropriate order within four weeks. The petitioners upon filing of their representations got the impugned order in which, their prayer has been declined by the respondent authorities. 8. The issue which has been raised by way of this petition has already been settled by this Court in WPS No.2263 of 2021, WPS No.2354 of 2021 and WPS No.356 of 2022, in which, this Court after hearing the parties has held in paras 9 to 12 which is as follows: “9. The grievance of the petitioners as projected by them seems that they are raising dispute stating that by transfer, they have been placed in the gradation list below to their juniors. The petitioners were serving in the erstwhile District of Balodabazar-Bhatapara, however, subsequently when a new District i.e. Balodabazar and Bhatapara has been created from Raipur, they have opted for old District Raipur, in which they were earlier posted and, as such, they cannot be placed in the gradation list below to their juniors. 9 So far as the law for gradation list is concerned, the gradation list are being prepared on the basis of initial service and thereafter to be considered according to their merits. The gradation list according to the service rules of the petitioners would be considered on the basis of merit cum seniority. There is no dispute at all that on merits, the petitioners are not objecting to their juniors. The only thing against the petitioners is that they have opted for their old District Raipur and not for newly created District Balodabazar- Bhatapara. Earlier, a common gradation list was prepared in which the petitioners were above their juniors and they have been placed on their right place, however, due to creation of new District Balodabazar-Bhatapara, they have opted for old District Raipur, thereafter, their gradation list was prepared in which they have been placed below to their juniors who were already working at Raipur District. 10. Considering the arguments advanced by the parties, considering the laws laid down by the Hon’ble Supreme Court, it is revealed that there is no difference between Inter-District transfer on self request and administrative basis, therefore, 10 the seniority of the petitioners has to be reckoned from their respective date of appointment on the post of Primary School Head Master and not from the date of joining at transferred district. The respondents are considering the fact that the seniority will not be changed upon going on transferred place and it will remain one and same. If a person has joined in place A and thereafter subsequently, for any reason, he got transferred to place B, then in both the places, his/her dated of joining would be same and one for all the purposes of his/her service. It cannot be held and declare that he/she become junior upon joining new place of posting. Even if any circular to this effect has been passed, it would be violative of Articles 14 & 16 of the Constitution of India. One cannot be declared junior by virtue of his/her transfer to another District. The judgment cited by the intervenors stating that when the government servant is transferred on his own request, then the transferred employee will have to forego his/her seniority till the date of transfer, and will be placed at the bottom below the juniormost employee in the category in the new cadre or department. This is because a government 11 servant getting transferred to another unit or department for his/her personal consideration, cannot be permitted to disturb the seniority of the employees in the department to which he/she is transferred, by claiming that his service in the department from which he has been transferred, should be taken into account. 11. In light of the aforesaid discussion, it is apparent on the face of record that the gradation list prepared by the authorities are erroneous and the same is required to be rectified while amending the same and while placing the petitioners in their right place on the basis of their initial joining of service. The mere getting transferred on own request would not render the petitioners to be placed under their juniors. 12. In the result, the relief claimed by the petitioners is required to be granted to them and accordingly the writ petitions are allowed while directing the respondent authorities to rectify the impugned gradation list and to prepare a fresh gradation list in accordance with law by placing the petitioners in their proper gradation list. The petitioners are also entitled to get their seniority on the post of Headmaster with effect from 12 10.12.2010 i.e. the date of joining on the post of Headmaster, Primary School with all consequential benefits.” 9. Considering the case in hand and particularly considering the fact that the present matter is identical to earlier petitions decided by this Court, the respondent authorities are directed to consider the case of the petitioners for grant of promotion on the post of Head Master taking into consideration their initial date of appointment and to give them all consequential benefits in accordance with law. 10. With the aforesaid observation/direction, this Writ Petition is disposed of. Sd/- (Amitendra Kishore Prasad) Judge Avinash