1 CGHC010140252019 2026:CGHC:32509 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPS No. 3432 of 2019 1 - Kundan Singh S/o Late Looti Singh Aged About 63 Years R/o H - 1, Rajb- hawan Colony, Akashwani, Near Kali Mandir, Raipur Chhattisgarh., District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh ... Petitioner(s) versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Secretary, Department Of Tourism, Mahanadi Bhawan, Mantralaya, Post And Police Station Mandir Hasaud, Raipur Chhattisgarh., District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh 2 - Chhattisgrh Tourism Board Through The Managing Director Udyog Bhawan, Ring Road No. 1, Telibandha, Raipur Chhattisgarh., District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh --- Respondent(s) For Petitioner : Mr. Varun Sharma, Advocate For Respondent/State : Mr. Rahul Tamaskar, G.A. For Respondent No. 2 : Mr. Suyash Dhar Badgaiya Hon’ble Shri Sanjay K. Agrawal, Judge Order on Board 29.07.2026 1. The present writ petitions have been filed for the following relief(s):- “10.1 That this Hon’ble Court may kindly be pleased to call for the records of the case from the respondents. 10.2 That this Hon’ble Court may kindly be pleased to direct the respondent No. 2 to consider and grant the benefit of time bound promotion to the petitioner under Digitally signed by JYOTI JHA Date: 2026.07.30 12:29:26 +0530 2 Rule 13(iii) of the Chhattisgarh Tourism Board Recruit- ment and Promotion Rules, 2015 10.3 That, the Hon’ble court may kindly be pleased to complete the process in a fixed time frame 10.4 That the Hon’ble court may kindly be pleased to grant any other relief(s), as it may deems fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case may be given” 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is ag- grieved by the inaction of respondent No.2 in denying him the benefit of the time-bound scale under Rule 13(iii) of the Chhattisgarh Tourism Board Recruitment and Promotion Rules, 2015 (for short, "the Service Rules"). It is submitted that similarly situated employees have been granted the benefit of the time-bound scale vide order dated 25.10.2016 (collectively filed as Annexure P/1), whereas the petitioner has been arbitrarily denied the same despite being legally entitled un- der the Service Rules. The petitioner has also submitted a detailed rep- resentation (Annexure P/11) requesting grant of the aforesaid benefit; however, the said representation has remained pending and has not been decided by respondent No.2 till date. 3. Learned counsel appearing for the respondents does not oppose the limited prayer made on behalf of the petitioner. 4. In view of the limited prayer, the petitioner is granted liberty to submit a fresh representation before the competent authority within a period of three weeks from today. Upon such representation being filed, the competent authority shall consider and decide the same strictly in ac- cordance with the applicable rules, by passing a reasoned and speak- 3 ing order, within a further period of two weeks’ from the date of receipt of representation. 5. It is made clear that this Court has not expressed any opinion on the merits of the cases of the petitioner. 6. Accordingly, the present writ petitions stand disposed of. Sd/- (Sanjay K. Agrawal) Judge Jyoti