1 2026:CGHC:8946 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPS No. 2368 of 2020 B. K. Bijroniya, S/o. Shri M.L. Bijroniya, Aged About 56 Years, Resident Of House No. B-1, Shatabdi Nagar, New Udyog Bhawan, Telibandha, Raipur, District Raipur, Chhattisgarh. ... Petitioner versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh, Through The Principal Secretary, Agriculture Department, Mahanadi Bhawan, Mantralaya, New Raipur, District Raipur Chhattisgarh. 2 - The Deputy Secretary, Government Of Chhattisgarh, Agriculture Department, Mahanadi Bhawan, Mantralaya, New Raipur, District Raipur Chhattisgarh. ... Respondents For Petitioner : Mr. Goutam Khetrapal, Advocate For Respondents : Mr. Sharad Mishra, Panel Lawyer (Single Bench) Hon'ble Shri Justice Sanjay K. Agrawal Order on Board ASHOK SAHU Digitally signed by ASHOK SAHU Date: 2026.02.20 12:09:29 +0530 2 19.02.2026 1. The petitioner has preferred this petition calling in question the legality, validity and correctness of the order dated 09.09.2019 by which the representation of the petitioner for grant of promotion to the post of Joint Director (Agriculture) has been rejected finding no merit. 2. Mr. Goutam Khetrapal, learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner has not been granted the benefit of circular dated 20.10.2005 and, as such, the order dated 09/11.09.2019 (Annexure P-8) deserves to be set aside. 3. Mr. Sharad Mishra, learned State counsel would support the impugned order and submit that the circular dated 20.10.2005 only directs for relaxation and there is no express mandate to the Departmental Promotion Committee, therefore, the petition deserves to be dismissed. 4. I have heard learned counsel appearing for the parties and perused the documents meticulously. 5. Clause 2 of circular dated 20.10.2005 states as under : “inksUufr@ØeksUufr vFkok LFkk;hdj.k vFkok vU; fdlh ckr ds fy, Mh-ih-lh- vFkok Nkuchu lfefr }kjk fopkj djrs djrs le; vuqlwfpr {ks= dh inLFkkiuk dh vof/k ;fn fopkj esa 3 fy;k tk jgk gks rks bu o"kksZa ds xksiuh; izfrosnu ds ewY;kadu ds ckjs esa foHkkxh; inksUufr lfefr vFkok Nkuchu lfefr dks ;g lykg nh tkrh gS fd og **x** Js.kh ds xksiuh; izfrosnu dks **[k** Js.kh ekU; djus rFkk **[k** Js.kh ds xksiuh; izfrosnu dks **d** Js.kh ekU; djus ij fopkj dj ldrk gSA fdUrq ;g Li"V fd;k tkrk gS fd %& **?k** Js.kh dks **x** Js.kh ekU; ugha fd;k tk ldsxk rFkk **d** Js.kh dks **+d** ekU; ugha fd;k tkosxkA ;g ykHk dsoy vuqlwfpr {ks= esa dk;Z djus dh vof/k ds fy, gh fn;k tk ldsxkA layXuhdj.k vU;= gksus ij ;g ykHk ugh a fn;k tk;sxkA** 6. A careful perusal of the aforesaid circular dated 20.10.2005 would show that the Departmental Promotion Committee has been empowered to give some relaxation if the petitioner is government servant and posted in the scheduled area. However, the representation of petitioner is rejected only on the ground that in place of circular dated 20.10.2005, it has been mentioned as 05.07.2005. Accordingly, the impugned order dated 09/11.09.2019 is set aside and the matter is remitted back to the competent authority to decide the representation of the petitioner dated 29.01.2020 in accordance with law, as early as possible, preferably within a period of three months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. However, it is made clear that this Court has not expressed any opinion on the merit of the case and the respondent 4 authorities shall decide the case of the petitioner, on its own merits, strictly in accordance with law. 7. In view of the above, this writ petition is allowed to the above extent. No cost. Sd/- (Sanjay K. Agrawal) Ashok Judge