1 / 3 2026:CGHC:21690 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPS No. 3997 of 2026 Dr Ajay Kumar Pillai Son Of Mr. V.A. Pillai Aged About 60 Years Resi- dent Of 59/12 Nehru Nagar (East) Bhilai, District -Durg (C.G.) ... Petitioner(s) versus 1. State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Secretary,higher Education De- partment Mantralaya Atal Nagar New Raipur, District Raipur (C.G.) 2. The Under Secretary (Up-Sachiv),department Of Higher Education Government Of Chhattisgarh Mantralaya Mahanadi Bhawan, Atal Nagar Naya Raipur District Raipur (C.G.) 3. The Commissioner Department Of Higher Education Government Of Chhattisgarh Indrawati Bhawan /directorate Of Higher Education Atal Nagar Naya Raipur, District Raipur (C.G.) 4. The Principal Vishwanath Yadav Tamaskar Postgraduate Science College, Durg District -Durg (C.G.) 5. Chhattisgarh Public Service Commission (Psc) Through Its Secretary, North Block, Sector-19, Atal Nagar,naya Raipur District Raipur (C.G.) ... Respondent(s) For Petitioner : Mr. Goutam Khetrapal, Advocate For Respondents-State : Mr. Garry Mukhopadhyay, Addl. A.G. For Respondent/ PSC : Ms. Shubhi Rusia on behalf of Mr. Sudeep Agrawal, Advocate Hon’ble Shri Bibhu Datta Guru, Judge Order on Board 08/05/2026 JYOTI SHARMA Digitally signed by JYOTI SHARMA Date: 2026.05.09 11:20:47 +0530 2 / 3 1. Petitioner has filed this writ petition seeking following reliefs. “10.1 The Hon’ble Court may kindly be pleased to issue an appropriate writ, thereby directing the respondents to de- cide the pending representation of peti- tioner dated 13.03.2026 (Annexure P-11), within stipulated period. 10.2 The Hon’ble Court may kindly be pleased to direct the respondents to im- mediately consider the petitioner for pro- motion to the post of Professor with all consequential benefits including arrears of pay, seniority and other retiral benefits. 10.3 The Hon’ble Court may kindly be pleased to pass such other order(s) or di- rection(s) as this Hon’ble Court may deem fit and proper in the facts and cir- cumstances of the case in the interest of justice.” 2. Learned counsel for petitioner submits that petitioner was not pro- moted on the post of Professor from the post of Assistant Profes- sor considering the ACR which was not communicated to peti- tioner enabling him to made representation. He contended that respondents-authorities could not have taken into consideration ACR of petitioner which was not communicated at the time of con- sideration of his name for promotion. In support of his contention, he places reliance upon the case of Dev Dutt vs. Union of India reported in (2008) 8 SCC 725. Petitioner has submitted represen- tation raising his grievance before Respondent No. 1 on 13.03.2026 which is pending consideration and therefore at this stage he is not pressing this writ petition on merit and only seek- ing direction to consider and take decision on the representation at the earliest within specific time frame. He further submits that petitioner may also be permitted to submit fresh representation to 3 / 3 be considered by the concerned authorities along with pending representation. 3. Learned counsel for State submits that in view of the limited prayer made by learned counsel for petitioner, he is having no ob- jection. 4. On due consideration of the submission of learned counsel for the respective parties, this writ petition at this stage is dispose of per- mitting the petitioner to submit fresh comprehensive representa- tion along with all relevant documents before Respondent No. 1 and if such a representation is submitted the concerned authority shall consider and take decision on the representation to be sub- mitted by petitioner, in accordance with law, expeditiously, prefer- ably within a further period of 02 months from the date of receipt of representation. 5. Accordingly, with the aforesaid observation and direction, this writ petition is disposed of. Sd/- (Bibhu Datta Guru) JUDGE Jyoti