1 2026:CGHC:22025 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPS No. 4233 of 2022 Pradeep Kumar Pandey S/o Rambahor Pandey, Aged About 56 Years R/o 2a/7, Secl Officers Residential Compound, Baikunthpur, District Korea, Chhattisgarh. ... Petitioner versus 1 - Coal India Limited Through Chairman-Cum-Managing Director, Coal India Limited, Coal Bhawan, Parisar No. 04-Mar, Plot No. Af-3, Action Area-1a, New Town, Rajarhat, Kolkata, (West Bengal) 700156. 2 - The Director (P And Ir), Coal India Limited, Coal Bhawan, Parisar No. 04- Mar, Plot No. Af-3, Action Area-1a, New Town, Rajarhat, Kolkata, (West Bengal) 700156. 3 - General Manager (Personnel/recruitment), Coal India Limited, Coal Bhawan, Parisar No. 04-Mar, Plot No. Af-3, Action Area-1a, New Town, Rajarhat, Kolkata, (West Bengal) 700156. 4 - South Eastern Coalfields Limited, Through Chairman-Cum-Managing Director, South Eastern Coalfields Limited, Seepat Road, Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh 5 - General Manager (Personnel/establishment), South Eastern Coalfields Limited, Head Quarters, Seepat Road, Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh 6 - The Chief General Manager, South Eastern Coalfields Limited, Bakunthpur Area, District Koriya, Chhattisgarh. 7 - Shri Swaminath Singh Yadav S/o Shri Rammurat Singh Yadav, Aged About 58 Years Manager (Civil), E-5 Grade, Through General Manager (P/e), Northern Coalfields Ltd., Singrauli, District Singrauli, Madhya Pradesh ... Respondent(s) Digitally signed by NADIM MOHLE 2 For Petitioner : Mr. Chandresh Shrivastava, Advocate For Respondents No.1 to 6 : Mr. Malay Shrivastava, Advocate Hon’ble Shri Justice Rakesh Mohan Pandey Order on Board 11/05/2026 1. The petitioner has filed this petition seeking the following relief(s):- “10.1. The Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to call for the entire record pertaining to the case of the petitioner. 10.2. The Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to direct the respondent authorities to grant promotion to the petitioner in E-4 grade from wajeer 28.06.2017 and further to E-5 Grade with notional seniority from 03.09.2021 along with payment of arrears at par with the respondent No. 7. 10.3. The Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to direct the respondent authorities to consider the candidature of the petitioner and to make fixation of pay removing the anomaly with all consequential benefits in favour of the petitioner. 10.4. The Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to direct the respondent authorities to consider the representation of the petitioner in accordance with law at the earliest and grant promotion and consequential benefits. 10.5. Any other relief, which this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper may also be awarded to the petitioner including the cost of the petition.” 3 2. Mr. Chandresh Shrivastava, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner and respondent No. 7 were initially appointed to the post of Overseer (Civil) Trainee under the SECL/respondent. The petitioner was appointed vide order dated 24.05.1988, whereas respondent No. 7 was appointed vide order dated 10.09.1988. He would further submit that vide order dated 15.12.2001, the petitioner and respondent No. 7 were placed in Grade B and Grade A, respectively. Later on, both were promoted to the post of Senior Officer (Civil) in E-2 Grade vide promotion order dated 23.04.2015. He would also submit that vide order dated 21.10.2019, respondent No. 7 was promoted to the post of Deputy Manager (Civil)/E-4 Grade with notional seniority and notional fixation w.e.f. 28.06.2017 but petitioner who is senior to respondent No.7 was not granted promotion. He would contend that the representation made by the petitioner before respondent No. 2 on 01.04.2020 is still pending consideration. He would pray that a direction may be issued to the respondent authorities to decide the same expeditiously, strictly in accordance with law and petitioner may be granted seniority and notional fixation w.e.f. 28.06.2017, when respondent No. 7 was promoted to the post of Deputy Manager (Civil)/E-4 Grade. 4 3. On the other hand, Mr. Malay Shrivastava, learned counsel for the respondents No.1 to 6, would submit that the petitioner has a right to claim promotion and notional seniority. 4. Heard learned counsel appearing for the parties and perused the documents. 5. Taking into consideration the limited prayer made by counsel for the petitioner, this petition, at this juncture, is disposed of reserving liberty in favour of the petitioner to make a fresh representation before respondent No. 2 within a period of 45 days, and in turn, respondent No. 2 is directed to decide the same within a further period of 90 days. 6. With the aforesaid observation(s) and direction(s), this writ petition is hereby disposed of. Sd/- Rakesh Mohan Pandey JUDGE Nadim