1 2026:CGHC:14570 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPS No. 2802 of 2026 1 - Vandana Sao S/o Shri Hemkant Das Aged About 43 Years Post- Lecturer (Lb) Govt. Higher Secodary School, Chhindwada, Block Darbha, Bastar, District Bastar (C.G.) ... Petitioner Versus 1 - State Govt. Of C.G. Through- The Secretary, School Education Department, Ministry, Mahanadi Bhawan, P.S. Rakhi, New Raipur (C.G.) 2 - District Education Officer Bastar, District Bastar (C.G.) 3 - Principal Higher Secondary School, Chhindawada Distt. Bastar (C.G.) ... Respondents For Petitioner : Mr. Tikeshwar Prasad Kaushik, Advocate For Respondents-State : Ms. Poorva Tiwari, Panel Lawyer SB: Hon'ble Shri Parth Prateem Sahu, Judge ORDER ON BOARD 27/03 /2026 1. The petitioner has filed this writ petition seeking following reliefs:- “10.1 That the Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to order respondents to treat the date of first appointment of the petitioner from 01.09.2008 from the date of first appointment as Shiksha Karmi Varg - 2. 10.2 Any other relief which may be suitable in the facts and circumstances of the case, may also be granted. ” 2 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner was earlier appointed as Shiksha Karmi Grade – 2 and thereafter, petitioner has participated in the fresh recruitment proceedings for appointment of Shiksha Karmi Grade – I and was appointed on 05.06.2009. Since then, he was working as Shiksha Karmi Grade – 1 till her absorption in School Education Department and now, petitioner is working as Lecturer. He however submits that the services of the petitioner which she rendered as Shiksha Karmi Grade – 2 has not been entered in the service records and therefore, she has suffered loss of seniority or loss while computing retiral dues. Petitioner has submitted representation before the Respondent No. 2 on 21.01.2026 which is pending consideration and therefore, direction be issued to the Respondent No. 2 to consider and take decision on the representation at the earliest within specified time frame. 3. On the other hand, learned counsel for the Respondents/State would submit that as petitioner is not pressing this writ petition on merits and is only seeking a direction to the Respondent No. 2 to consider and take decision on the representation, she is having no objection to the limited prayer. 4. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the documents placed on record. 5. On due consideration of the submission of counsel for the respective parties, facts and circumstances of the case, nature of grievance raised by the petitioner, without entering into the merits of the claim of petitioner, this writ petition at this stage is disposed of directing the Respondent No. 2 to consider and take decision on the representation dated 21.01.2026 (Annexure P/1) submitted by the petitioner in accordance with law, expeditiously, preferably within a period of 03 months from the date of receipt of order. 3 6. With the aforesaid observation and direction, this writ petition stands disposed of. Sd/- (Parth Prateem Sahu) Judge Dey SHUBHAM DEY Digitally signed by SHUBHAM DEY