1 2026:CGHC:21975 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPS No. 6636 of 2021 * - Dulichand Rathia S/o Rajaram Rathia Aged About 48 Years Presently Posted And Working As Lecturer, Higher Secondary School, Chhote Gumda, Block Gharghoda, District Raigarh, Chhattisgarh. ... Petitioner Versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Secretary, Department Of School Education, Mahanadi Mantralaya, Naya Raipur, Atal Nagar, Post Office And Police Station Naya Raipur, Atal Nagar, District Raipur, Chhattisgarh. 2 – Director, Directorate Of Public Instruction (T-Cadre), Indrawati Bhawan, Naya Raipur, Atal Nagar, Post Office And Police Station Naya Raipur, Atal Nagar, District Raipur, Chhattisgarh. 3 - District Education Officer Raigarh, District Raigarh, Chhattisgarh. ... Respondents For Petitioner : Mr. Anuroop Panda, Advocate For Respondents/State : Mr. Vivek Siddharth Ojha, Panel Lawyer 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.i That, this Hon’ble Court may kindly be pleased to direct the respondent authorities to grant promotion to the petitioner w.e.f. 3/12/2017 when other Head Masters were promoted to the post of Lecturer and also grant him all consequential benefits form the date of his actual entitlement. 10.ii Cost of the petition may also be granted to the petitioner. Digitally signed by RAMESH KUMAR VATTI Date: 2026.05.12 19:41:47 +0530 2 10.iii Any other relief, which this Hon’ble Court deems fit and proper, may also kindly be granted to the petitioner, in the interest of justice.” 2. Mr. Anuroop Panda, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would submit that initially the petitioner was appointed on the post of Assistant Teacher vide order dated 02.04.1996 in High School, Saraipali, Block Tamnar, thereafter he was promoted to the post of Head Master on 27.12.2010, but due to mistake of the department, his name was not included in the seniority list of the Head Master published in the year 2014. He would contend that the petitioner was eligible for promotion to the post of Lecturer in the year 2017, but his name was not considered as his name was not available in the seniority list of Head Masters. He would further contend that the petitioner made a representation claiming therein promotion from year 2017 and subsequently, he was promoted to the post Lecturer vide order dated 29.09.2018 (Annexure P-4). He would submit that the petitioner is entitled for promotion w.e.f. 03.02.2017 with all consequential benefits, therefore, the petitioner may be permitted to make a representation before the respondent No. 2 and the said authority may be directed to decide it expeditiously strictly in accordance with law. 3. Mr. Vivek Siddharth Ojha, learned Panel Lawyer appearing for the respondents/State would submit that the petitioner has claimed promotion w.e.f. 03.02.2017, but has filed this petition in the year 2021 without explaining delay part. 4. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the documents. 3 5. Taking into consideration the limited prayer made by Mr. Panda, this petition is disposed of reserving liberty in favour of the petitioner to make afresh representation before the respondent No. 2 within a period of 30 days from today and in turn, the said authority is directed to decide it expeditiously strictly in accordance with law. 6. With the aforesaid direction(s), this petition is disposed of. Sd/- (Rakesh Mohan Pandey) Judge vatti