1 2026:CGHC:21118 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPS No. 3906 of 2026 1 - Rajesh Kumar Verma S/o Jhasketan Verma Aged About 35 Years Presently Working As Lecturer (English) T-Cadre At Govt- Higher Secondary School, Tolma - Block- Lailunga District- Raigarh (C.G.) ... Petitioner versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Secretary Department Of School Education Mantralaya Mahanadi Bhawan Atal Nagar, Naya Raipur District- Raipur (C.G.) 2 - The Secretary Department Of Tribal And Scheduled Caste Development Mantralaya Mahanadi Bhawan Atal Nagar Naya Raipur District - Raipur (C.G.) 3 - Commissioner Department Of Tribal And Scheduled Caste Development Indravati Bhawan Atal Nagar Naya Raipur District- Raipur (C.G.) 4 - Collector Tribal Development Department District- Raigarh (C.G.) 5 - Assistant Commissioner Tribal Development Department Raigarh District- Raigarh (C.G.) ... Respondent(s) (Cause title is taken from CIS) For Petitioners : Mr. Rupendra Kumar Dewangan, Advocate For Respondents-State : Mr. Vivek Verma, Govt. Advocate SB: Hon'ble Shri Parth Prateem Sahu, Judge RAVI SHANKAR MANDAVI Digitally signed by RAVI SHANKAR MANDAVI Date: 2026.05.13 19:09:27 +0530 2 Order on Board 06/05/2026 1. Petitioners have filed this writ petition seeking following reliefs:- “10.1. That, this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to call for the entire records in relates to the case of the petitioner from the possession of respondents for its kind perusal. 10.2 That, this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to direct the respondents particularly the respondent No.5 to refund of the amount to the sum of Rs.33128/- (one month salary) to the petitioner with interest @ 18% per annum, which was deposited by him while tendering of technical resignation within a stipulated period of 15 days. 10.3 That, this Hon'ble Court may kindly further be pleased to direct the respondents to consider and decide the pending representation (annexure-P/6) within a period of 15 days with reasoned and speaking order. 10.4 That, this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to grant any other relief/relief's in favour of the petitioners, which the Hon'ble Court deemed fit & just in the facts and circumstances of the case, including awarding of the costs to the petitioner. ” 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner while employed on the post of Assistant Teacher LB participated in the recruitment proceeding for the post of Teacher in which petitioner became successful and pursuant to the appointment order issued, he has tendered technical resignation to join the new post. Technical resignation submitted by the petitioner was accepted subject to their deposit one month’s salary and the petitioner was permitted to join on the newly appointed post 3 (Teacher). He contended that in the fact of the case petitioner was not required to deposit salary of one month as petitioner while working in the same department has been appointed on the superior post by the same department. However, pursuant to the direction issued by the respondent No.5, petitioner was forced to deposit one month salary as petitioner has to join the post within the stipulated period. He submits that according to law petitioner was not required to deposit one month’s salary, therefore, now petitioner has submitted application/representation before respondent No.5 to refund of the one month’s salary which petitioner has deposited at the time of tendering technical resignation. The application/representation submitted by the petitioner is not considered and decided therefore, direction be issued to respondent No.5 to consider and take decision on the representations dated 22.07.2022 at the earliest. 3. Counsel for the State submits that as petitioner is not pressing this petition on merits and only seeking a direction to respondent No.5 to take decision on pending representation, he is having no objection to the limited prayer made. 4. On due consideration of the submission of learned counsel for respective parties, the writ petition at this stage is disposed of directing the respondent No.5 to consider and take decision on the application/representation submitted by the petitioner as mentioned above in accordance with law, on its own merits 4 expeditiously preferably within further period of 3 months from the date of receipt of order. 5. Petitioner is at liberty to file fresh representation before the respondent No.5 and in the event, such representation is submitted, concerned authority shall consider and take decision on the same also along with pending representation as ordered above. 6. With the aforesaid observation and direction, this writ petition stands disposed of. Sd/- (Parth Prateem Sahu) Judge Ravi Mandavi