1 CGHC010313312026 2026:CGHC:35855 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPS No. 6088 of 2026 Harinarayan Pandey Son Of B. P. Pandey, Aged About 57 Years Lecturer (L. B.), Presently Postrd At Shaheed Narendra Sharma Govt. Higher Secondary School, Kheli, Block Kawardha, District Kabirdham, Chhattisgarh. ... Petitioner(s) versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through Secretary, Education Department, Mantralaya, Mahanadi Bhawan, Nava Raipur, Atal Nagar, District Raipur (C.G.). 2 - Director, Public Instructions, Indrawati Bhawan, Nava Raipur, Atal Nagar, District Raipur (C.G.) 3 - Divisional Joint Director, Durg, District Durg (C.G.) 4 - District Education Officer Kabirdham, District Kabirdham (C.G.) ... Respondent(s) (Cause title taken from CIS) 2 For Petitioner(s) : Shri C. Jayant K. Rao, Advocate For Respondent(s) : Shri Anadi Sharma, Panel Lawyer Hon’ble Shri Bibhu Datta Guru, Judge Order on Board 13.08.2026 1. By way of the present petition, the petitioner is seeking a direction to the respondents to correct the gradation list dated 31.07.2026, wherein the petitioner has been shown as an “untrained Lecturer”, despite the petitioner having acquired the qualification of D.El.Ed. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner, referring to the D.El.Ed. certificate annexed at page 13 of the petition, as well as the previous gradation list dated 25.11.2024, submits that the petitioner possesses the qualification of D.El.Ed. It is submitted that in the gradation list dated 25.11.2024, the qualification of the petitioner was correctly recorded as D.El.Ed.; however, in the subsequent gradation list dated 31.07.2026, the petitioner has inadvertently been shown as an untrained Lecturer. 3 3. It is further submitted that the petitioner has already submitted representations before respondent Nos. 3 and 4, vide Annexure P-6, seeking necessary correction in the gradation list. The documents relied upon by the petitioner in support of the said representations have also been placed on record along with the present writ petition. 4. Learned State counsel submits that the representations dated 10.06.2026 and 03.08.2026 submitted by the petitioner are pending consideration before the competent authority. He further submits that, in case the said representations are still pending consideration, the same shall be considered and decided by the competent authority within a period of 30 days from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. 5. Considering the aforesaid submission, the writ petition is disposed of with a direction to the concerned authority to consider and decide the pending representation(s) of the petitioner, in accordance with law, after duly verifying the documents placed on record by the petitioner, within a period of 30 days from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. 4 6. It is made clear that this Court has not expressed any opinion on the merits of the petitioner’s claim, and the competent authority shall consider and decide the representations independently, in accordance with law and on the basis of the documents available on record. 7. With the aforesaid direction, the writ petition stands disposed of. Sd/- (Bibhu Datta Guru) JUDGE shoaib