1 2026:CGHC:26032 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPS No. 1100 of 2023 D.R. Thakur S/o Shri D.D.S. Thakur Aged About 58 Years Assistant Sub Inspector, P.S. Pali, District Korba (C.G.) --- Petitioner versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Secretary, Department Of Home Affairs (Po- lice), Mantralaya, Mahanadi Bhawan, Naya Raipur, District Raipur (C.G.) 2 - The Director General Of Police Office Of The Director General Of Police, Naya Raipur, District Raipur (C.G.) 3 - The Inspector General Of Police Bilaspur Range, District Bilaspur (C.G.) 4 - The Superintendent Of Police Mungeli, District Mungeli (C.G.) 5 - The Superintendent Of Police Bilaspur, District Bilaspur (C.G.) --- Respondents For Petitioner : Mr. Abhishek Pandey, Adv. with Mr. Rishabh Dev Sahu, Adv. For Respondents : Mr. Siddharth Sahu, Panel Lawyer. Hon'ble Shri Justice Naresh Kumar Chandravanshi Order On Board 19-6 -202 6 1 Heard learned counsel for the parties on admission. 2 The petitioner has preferred this writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking following reliefs :- “10.1 That, this Hon’ble Court may kindly be pleased to set aside/ quash the order dated 14-11-2022 2 (Annexure P-9) passed by the respondent No. 2 and the petitioner may kindly be exonerated and promoted on the post of Sub Inspector w.e.f. 10-4-2020 along with consequential benefit. 10.2 Any other relief which the Hon’ble Court may deem fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case, may also be allowed. 3 Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that, vide order dated 10-4-2020 (Annexure P-2), the petitioner was promoted from the post of Assistant Sub Inspector to the post of Sub In- spector by the respondent no. 4/Superintendent of Police, Bi- laspur, but that order was recalled vide order dated 17-7-2020 (Annexure P-3) on the ground that, when he was granted promo- tion, at that time, departmental enquiry was pending against him. It is the contention of learned counsel for the petitioner that, vide order (Annexure P-4) dated 11-10-2021, though the petitioner was imposed penalty of Rs. 2,500/- by the respondent No. 3/ In- spector General of Police, Bilaspur/Disciplinary Authority, there- fore, effect of that order would be for one year i.e. uptill 10-10- 2022. Thus, the petitioner was entitled for promotion on 11-10- 2021 onwards, but, he was granted promotion on the post of Sub Inspector only on 28-8-2023. Hence, he prays that relief sought for by the petitioner may be granted to him. 3 4 On the other hand, learned counsel for the respondents/State, referring to their reply, would submit that, on 10-4-2020, when the petitioner was promoted to the post of Sub Inspector, at that time, fact of pendency of departmental enquiry was not brought into the knowledge of competent authority, therefore, inadver- tantly, he was promoted vide order (Annexure p-2) dated 10-4- 2020, which was recalled vide order (Annexure P-3) dated 17-7- 2020, when the authority came to know about aforesaid mistake. Learned counsel further submits that, since the petitioner was in- flicted penalty of Rs. 2,500/- in departmental enuqiry vide order (Annexure P-4) dated 11-10-2021, therefore, effect of that penalty was for one year i.e. till 10-10-2022. Thereafter, the meeting of Departmental Promotion Committee was held in the month of August, 2023, then petitioner was promoted vide order dated 28-8-2023. Thus, since departmental enquiry was pending against the petitioner, hence his promotion order dated 10-4- 2020 (annexure P-2) was rightly recalled, as such, the petitioner is not entitled to get promotion from aforesaid date i.e. 10-4- 2020. 5 Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the material available on record. 6 It is not in dispute that, when order of promotion (Annexure P-2) was passed on 10-4-2020, at that time, departmental enquiry 4 was pending against the petitioner, therefore, his promotion was recalled vide order dated 17-7-2020 (Annexure P-3). In depart- mental enquiry, he was inflicted penalty of Rs. 2,500/- on 11-10- 2021 and effect of same was uptill 10-10-2022, thereafter no DPC was held prior to promotion order dated 28-8-2023. It is set- tled principal of law that, promotion cannot be claimed as a mat- ter of right. It is not the case of the petitioner that, after 10-10- 2022, any DPC was convened, in which he was left for consider- ation. 7 In view of above facts, this Court is not inclined to admit this pe- tition. Hence the same is dismissed at motion stage. 8 Pending interlocutory application(s), if any, stands disposed of. Sd/- (Naresh Kumar Chandravanshi) Judge Pathak AVANISH KUMAR PATHAK Digitally signed by AVANISH KUMAR PATHAK Date: 2026.06.25 12:17:31 +0530