1 CGHC010026742022 2026:CGHC:36056 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPS No. 608 of 2022 1 - Pradeep Kailash Chandrikapure S/o Late H.L. Chandrikapure Aged About 54 Years R/o Bade Bhawani Nagar, Behind Kota Colony, Kota Raipur , District Raipur Chhattisgarh. 2 - Smt. Bharti Sori W/o Ramesh Sori Aged About 49 Years R/o House No. H - 5, Pt. Ravi Shankar University Campus, Raipur , District Raipur Chhattisgarh. --- Petitioner(s) versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through Secretary, Department Of High Education, Mantralaya, Mahanadi Bhawan, Atal Nagar Raipur , District Raipur Chhattisgarh. 2 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through Commissioner, Department Of High Education, Block 3, Second And Third Flour, Indirawati Bhawan, Naya Raipur , Atal Nagar, District Raipur Chhattisgarh. 3 - Pt. Ravi Shankar University Raipur Through Registrar, Pt. Ravi Shankar University , G.E. Road Raipur , District Raipur Chhattisgarh. 4 - President Obc Employee Union, Pt. Ravi Shankar University Campus, Raipur , District Raipur Chhattisgarh. --- Respondent(s) WITH WPS No. 614 of 2022 1 - Sawan Singh Dhruv S/o Late Kapil Singh Dhruv Aged About 52 Years R/o Changorabhata, Ayodhayanagar, Near Electricity Office Raipur Chhattisgarh. 2 - Paleshwar Singh Thakur S/o Late Arjun Singh Thakur Aged About 38 Years Add. Administration Department, Pt. Ravi Shankar University, Raipur, G.E. Road, Raipur, District Raipur Chhattisgarh. 2 3 - Chemanlal Thakur S/o D.R. Thakur Aged About 42 Years Add. History Department, Pt. Ravi Shankar University, Raipur, G.E. Road, Raipur, District Raipur Chhattisgarh. 4 - Sandeep Kumar Khargwanshi S/o Gayashankar Khargwanshi Aged About 35 Years Add. Confidential Department, Pt. Ravi Shankar University, Raipur G.E. Road, Raipur, District Raipur Chhattisgarh. 5 - Hup Singh Dhanendra S/o Late Chanduram Dhanendra Aged About 56 Years R/o I-29, Pt. Ravi Shankar University, Campus, G.E. Road, Raipur, District Raipur Chhattisgarh. 6 - Rajkishore S/o Balmat Aged About 52 Years Ravishankar Shukl Nagar, Amanaka, Kukur Beda, Near Bangali Colony Raipur, District Raipur Chhattisgarh. 7 - Avdhesh Kumar Gandharv S/o Late Sukhiram Gandharv Aged About 38 Years R/o B -174, Near Sai Mandir, Sarshwati Nagar, Raipur Chhattisgarh. 8 - Mamta Ghodesawar Aged About 39 Years, C/o Manoj Sahu, R/o Kanchanganga Phesh - Ii, Rohinipuram, Raipur, District Raipur Chhattisgarh. ---Petitioner(s) Versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through Secretary, Department Of High Education, Mantralaya, Mahanadi Bhawan, Atal Nagar, Raipur, District Raipur Chhattisgarh. 2 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through Commissioner, Department Of High Education, Block - 3, Second And Third Flour, Indirawati Bhawan, Nava Raipur, Atal Nagar, District Raipur Chhattisgarh. 3 - Pt. Ravi Shankar University Raipur Through Registrar, Pt. Ravi Shankar University, G.E. Road, Raipur, District Raipur Chhattisgarh. 4 - President Obc Employee Union, Pt. Ravi Shankar University, Campus, Raipur, District Raipur Chhattisgarh. ---Respondent(s) WITH WPS No. 619 of 2022 1 - Shayam Sonekar S/o Pyarelal Sonekar Aged About 37 Years R/o Lakhenagar , Near Sai Mandir , Pahaldhaba, Raipur , District Raipur Chhattisgarh. ---Petitioner(s) 3 Versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through Secretary Department Of High Education Mantralaya , Mahanadi Bhawan, Atal Nagar, Raipur District Raipur Chhattisgarh. 2 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through Commissioner , Department Of High Education, Block 3, Second And Third Flour, Indirawati Bhawan, Nava Raipur , Atal Nagar District Raipur Chhattisgarh. 3 - Pt. Ravi Shankar University Raipur Through Registrar Pt. Ravi Shankar University , G.E. Road , Raipur District Raipur Chhattisgarh. 4 - President Obc Employee Union , Pt. Ravi Shankar University Campus , Raipur , District Raipur Chhattisgarh. --- Respondent(s) WITH WPS No. 623 of 2022 1 - Mukesh Kumar Bhatpahari S/o Sundar Lal Bhatpahari Aged About 39 Years R/o House No. 244, Main Road, Village Sarona, Post Sarona, Ward 37 Minimata Ward, Police Station Urla, District Raipur, Chhattisgarh Pin 493221. 2 - Lobhram S/o Arun Kumar Aged About 35 Years R/o Village Baktara, Post Kedri, Tahsil Abhanpur, District Raipur, Chhattisgarh. Pin 493661. 3 - Smt. Renu Navrang, D/o Manharanlal Aged About 36 Years R/o Anuvarat Vihar, Teachers Colony, Kota Raipur, District Raipur, Chhattisgarh 492010. 4 - Smt. Sakuntla Manhare W/o Rakesh Manhare Aged About 33 Years R/o House No. 3841, Ward No. 54, Shashwat Nagar, Boriyakhurd, Raipur, District Raipur Chhattisgarh Pin 492013. ---Petitioner(s) Versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through Secretary, Department Of High Education, Mantralaya, Mahanadi Bhawan, Atal Nagar, Raipur, District Raipur Chhattisgarh. 2 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through Commissioner, Department Of High Education, Block - 3, Second And Third Flour, Indirawati Bhawan, Nava Raipur, Atal Nagar, District Raipur Chhattisgarh. 3 - Pt. Ravi Shankar University Raipur Through Registrar, Pt. Ravi Shankar University G.E. Road, Raipur, District Raipur Chhattisgarh. 4 4 - President Obc Employee Union, Pt. Ravi Shankar University Campus, Raipur, District Raipur Chhattisgarh --- Respondent(s) WITH WPS No. 721 of 2022 1 - Smt. Durgesh Nandani Joshi D/o Ishwar Prasad Khatkar Aged About 38 Years R/o Wallfort Paradise, H.No 29 Phese - Ii Kanul Raipur, District Raipur, Chhattisgarh., District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh 2 - Kumar Sonwani S/o Girdhari Sonwani Aged About 40 Years R/o House No I - 1, Pt. Ravi Shankar University, Campus, G.E. Road, Raipur, District Raipur, Chhattisgarh., District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh 3 - Neelam Tirki (Deleted) As Per Honble Court Order Dtd. 25-06-2026 4 - Nisha Thakur (Deleted) As Per Honble Court Order Dtd. 25-06-2026 5 - Smt. Alka Lakda (Deleted) As Per Honble Court Order Dtd. 25-06- 2026 ---Petitioner(s) Versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through Secretary, Department Of High Education, Mantralaya, Mahanadi Bhawan, Atal Nagar, Raipur, District Raipur, Chhattisgarh., District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh 2 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through Commissioner, Department Of High Education, Block-3, Second And Third Flour, Indirawati Bhawan, Nava Raipur, Atal Nagar, District Raipur, Chhattisgarh., District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh 3 - Pt. Ravi Shankar University, Raipur Through Registrar, Pt. Ravi Shankar University, G.E. Road, Raipur, District Raipur, Chhattisgarh., District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh 4 - President Obc Employee Union, Pt. Ravi Shankar University Campus, Raipur, District Raipur, Chhattisgarh., District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh --- Respondent(s) WITH WPS No. 1308 of 2022 1 - Jivanlal Sidar S/o Late Shayam Lal Sidar Aged About 50 Years R/o House No. 17, Pt. Ravi Shankar University Campus, Raipur, District- Raipur, Chhattisgarh, District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh 5 2 - Chaitram Kawar S/o Anup Singh Aged About 57 Years R/o House No. 3917, Phase-Ii, Matpurena, Rawatpura, Sector-2, Raipur, Chhattisgarh, District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh 3 - Dulari Thakur Wd/o Late N.K. Thakur Aged About 39 Years Add- Pt. Ravi Shankar University Campus, Raipur, District- Raipur, Chhattisgarh, District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh 4 - Ku. Duleshwari D/o Late Sudhir Kumar Badhai Aged About 38 Years Add- Pt. Ravi Shankar University Campus, Raipur, District- Raipur, Chhattisgarh, District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh 5 - Raghuveer Singh Thakur S/o Lakhanlal Thakur Aged About 46 Years R/o Kanchanganaga Colony, Phase-Ii, D.D.U. Raipur, Chhattisgarh, District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh ---Petitioner(s) Versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through Secretary, Department Of High Education, Mantralaya, Mahanadi Bhawan, Atal Nagar, Raipur, District- Raipur, Chhattisgarh, District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh 2 - State Of Chhattisgarh, Through- Commissioner, Department Of Higher Education, Block-3, Second And Third Flour, Indirawati Bhawan, Nava Raipur, Atal Nagar, District- Raipur, Chhattisgarh, District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh 3 - Pt. Ravi Shankar University, Raipur, Through- Registrar, Pt. Ravi Shankar University, G.E.- Road, Raipur, District- Raipur, Chhattisgarh, District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh 4 - President, Obc Employee Union, Pt. Ravi Shankar University Campus, Raipur, District- Raipur, Chhattisgarh, District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh 5 - Chhattisgarh Lok Ayog, Add- Gandhi Chowk Raipur, Tahsil And District- Raipur, Chhattisgarh, District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh --- Respondent(s) WITH WPS No. 1473 of 2022 1 - Ku. Nutan Sahu D/o Shri Tilak Ram Sahu Aged About 43 Years Working As Upper Division Clerk Grade - Ii And Posted At Pt. Ravi Shankar Shukl University Raipur, District Raipur Chhattisgarh. ---Petitioner(s) Versus 6 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through Secretary, Department Of Higher Education Mahanadi Bhawan, Mantralaya, Atal Nagar, New Raipur, District Raipur Chhattisgarh. 2 - Pandit Ravi Shankar Shukl University Through Registrar, Pt. Ravi Shankar Shukl University Raipur, District Raipur Chhattisgarh. --- Respondent(s) For Petitioners : Mr. Hemant Gupta, Advocate along with Mr. Shashi Kumar Kushwaha, Advocate and Mr. Satya Kumar Mandloi, Advocate For Respondent-State : Mr. Keshav Prasad Gupta, G.A. For Respondent- University : Mr. Neeraj Choubey, Advocate For Respondent-Union : Mr. Faisal Akhtar, Advocate Hon’ble Shri Justice Rakesh Mohan Pandey Judgment On Board 13.8.2026 1) Facts of present cases are that initially petitioners were appointed against sanctioned and vacant posts of Lower Division Clerk in Pt. Ravi Shankar University, Raipur in between 1998 to 2008. Thereafter, they were promoted to the posts of Upper Division Clerk-II, Upper Division Clerk-I and Junior Superintendent respectively. Latest promotions occurred in the year 2018 and on 25.8.2018, a seniority list was also published. Various complaints were made before the Chhattisgarh Lok Ayog to the effect that reservation roster was not followed while extending benefit of promotion to the petitioners. Lok Ayog examined the matter and directed the State Government to conduct an inquiry. Thereafter, a five member committee was constituted, which submitted its report on 14.9.2020 wherein it was observed that Rule 4(1) of 7 Chhattisgarh Lok Seva (Promotion) Rules, 2003 was not followed and benefit of promotion was extended with retrospective effect. On 14.12.2021, a tentative gradation list was published by the University and objections were invited from petitioners and other employees of university. Detailed representation(s)/ objection(s) were submitted before the respondent-University but those objections were turned down in cryptic manner and this fact is evident from letter dated 7.1.2022. 2) Mr. Hemant Gupta and Mr. Shashi Kumar Kushwaha, learned counsel appearing for the respective petitioners submit that objections raised by the petitioners were turned down in cryptic manner whereas the respondent-University should have assigned sufficient reasoning while deciding those objections. They further submit that petitioners were lastly promoted in the year 2018 and their respective seniority has been shuffled after completing 10 years of service without affording opportunity of hearing. They also submit that order dated 7.1.2022 whereby respondent- University has turned down the objections is bad in law and deserves to be quashed. 3) On the other hand, Mr. Neeraj Choubey, learned counsel appearing for respondent-University would oppose. He submits that petitioners were granted promotion contrary to service rules and reservation roster was also not followed therefore various complaints were made and Lok Ayog directed the State 8 Government to conduct an inquiry. He further submits that matter was thoroughly examined by the Committee and thereafter seniority list was published on 14.12.2021. He also submits that sufficient opportunity of hearing was afforded to the petitioners and their objections have been decided by way of a speaking order therefore these petitions are misconceived and liable to be dismissed. 4) Mr. Keshav Prasad Gupta, Govt. Advocate and Mr. Faisal Akhtar, Advocate would endorse the submission made by Mr. Choubey. 5) I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the material available on record. 6) Admittedly, petitioners who were initially appointed to the post of Lower Division Clerk were granted promotions to the posts of Upper Division Clerk-II, Upper Division Clerk-I and Junior Superintendent at regular intervals. Lastly, they were promoted in the year 2018 and various complaints were made before the Lok Ayog, which directed the State Government to inquire into the matter and resultantly, a 5-member committee was constituted. Later on, the seniority list was modified and objections were invited. Petitioners submitted objections, which were turned down vide memo dated 7.1.2022. 7) A careful perusal of memo dated 7.1.2022 would reveal that objections raised by the petitioners were turned down in cryptic manner without assigning sufficient reasons. Given that the 9 petitioners were granted promotion three times, and in certain instances four times, within a span of approximately twenty years, authority(s) concerned should have decided the objections raised by the petitioners with regard to seniority by way of speaking and reasoned orders. Reasoning contributes soul of a decision and in absence of proper reasoning, the order does not stand on its own legs. 8) In the matter of Kranti Associates Private Limited and Another Versus Masood Ahmed Khan and Others1, Hon’ble Supreme Court held that quasi judicial authority must record reasons in support of its conclusion as recording of reasons is meant to serve the wider principle of justice and it also operates as a valid restraint on any possible arbitrary exercise of judicial and quasi judicial or even administrative power. Relevant paragraph 47 reads as under :- 47. Summarizing the above discussion, this Court holds: a. In India the judicial trend has always been to record reasons, even in administrative decisions, if such decisions affect anyone prejudicially. b. A quasi-judicial authority must record reasons in support of its conclusions. c. Insistence on recording of reasons is meant to serve the wider principle of justice that justice must not only be done it must also appear to be done as well. d. Recording of reasons also operates as a valid restraint on any possible arbitrary exercise of judicial and quasi-judicial or even administrative power.e. Reasons reassure that discretion has been exercised 1. (2010) 9 SCC 496 10 by the decision maker on relevant grounds and by disregarding extraneous considerations. e. Reasons reassure that discretion has been exercised by the decision maker on relevant grounds and by disregarding extraneous considerations. f. Reasons have virtually become as indispensable a component of a decision making process as observing principles of natural justice by judicial, quasi-judicial and even by administrative bodies. g. Reasons facilitate the process of judicial review by superior Courts. h. The ongoing judicial trend in all countries committed to rule of law and constitutional governance is in favour of reasoned decisions based on relevant facts. This is virtually the life blood of judicial decision making justifying the principle that reason is the soul of justice. i. Judicial or even quasi- judicial opinions these days can be as different as the judges and authorities who deliver them. All these decisions serve one common purpose which is to demonstrate by reason that the relevant factors have been objectively considered. This is important for sustaining the litigants' faith in the justice delivery system. j. Insistence on reason is a requirement for both judicial accountability and transparency. k. If a Judge or a quasi-judicial authority is not candid enough about his/her decision making process then it is impossible to know whether the person deciding is faithful to the doctrine of precedent or to principles of incrementalism. l. Reasons in support of decisions must be cogent, clear and succinct. A pretence of reasons or `rubber- stamp reasons' is not to be equated with a valid decision making process. m. It cannot be doubted that transparency is the sine qua non of restraint on abuse of judicial powers. Transparency in decision making not only makes the judges and decision makers less prone to errors but also makes them subject to broader scrutiny. (See David Shapiro in Defence of Judicial Candor). n. Since the requirement to record reasons emanates from the broad doctrine of fairness in decision making, 11 the said requirement is now virtually a component of human rights and was considered part of Strasbourg Jurisprudence. See Ruiz Torija v. Spain, EEHR, at 562 para 29 and Anya vs. University of Oxford, wherein the Court referred to Article 6 of European Convention of Human Rights which requires, "adequate and intelligent reasons must be given for judicial decisions". o. In all common law jurisdictions judgments play a vital role in setting up precedents for the future. Therefore, for development of law, requirement of giving reasons for the decision is of the essence and is virtually a part of "due Process". 9) Having considered the facts of present cases and the law laid down by the Apex Court in the matter of Kranti Associates (supra), in my opinion, decision taken by the respondent- University whereby objections raised by the petitioners were turned down is not sustainable in the eyes of law. Accordingly, order/ memo dated 7.1.2022 pertaining to the petitioners is not sustainable in the eyes of law and is hereby quashed. 10) Accordingly, these petitions are disposed directing the respondent-University to decide the objections raised by the petitioners afresh by way of speaking order after affording due opportunity of hearing to the interested parties. Sd/- (Rakesh Mohan Pandey) JUDGE A j i n k y a Digitally signed by AJINKYA PANSARE Date: 2026.08.18 14:29:54 +0530