1 CGHC010289402022 2026:CGHC:34213 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPS No. 5836 of 2022 1 - Bhishm Kurrey S/o Bhuneshwar Kurrey, Aged About 28 Years Presently Posted As Peon At Office Of Sub-Tehsil Hasoud District Janjgir Champa R/o Village - Sonadah, Tehsil Bamhanidih, District Janjgir-Champa Chhattisgarh. ... Petitioner(s) versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through Its Secretary, Revenue And Disaster Management Department, Mahanadi Bhawan, Nawa Raipur, District Raipur Chhattisgarh. 2 - Collectoer, Janjgir-Champa, District Janjgir Champa. 3 - Collector, Sakti, District Sakti 4 - Sub - Divisional Office (Revenue) Sakti, District Janjgir -Champa Chhattisgarh. 5 - Tehsildar Jaijaipur, District Janjgir -Champa Chhattisgarh. 6 - Nayab Tehsildar, Hasoud, District Janjgir Champa Chhattisgarh. ... Respondent(s) For Petitioner/s : Ms. Dyna Bajrang, Advocate holding the brief of Ms. Monika Thakur, Advocate. For Respondents/State : Shri Amandeep Singh, P.L. NIRMALA RAO 2 Hon’ble Shri Justice Rakesh Mohan Pandey Order on Board 05/08/2026 1. The petitioner has filed this petition seeking the following relief(s):- “10.1 That this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to direct the order respondent authorities to consider the candidature of the petitioner for promotion on the post of Assistant Grade-III from the post of Peon (Class-IV) employee. 10.2 grant any other writ(s), order(s), relief(s) in favour of the petitioner, which the Hon'ble Court deemed fit & just in the facts and circumstances of the case, including awarding of the costs to the petitioner.” 2. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner was appointed to the post of Peon on 28.5.2014. She would contend that the petitioner successfully completed his probation period on 12.5.2017 and thereafter, made a representation on 18.8.2020 seeking promotion according to applicable Service Rules but till date, no decision has been taken. She would further submit that the petitioner has completed more than five years of service, yet his case has not been considered for promotion. She would submit that the petitioner may be permitted to make a detailed representation before respondent No.2 and in turn, the said authority was directed to decide the same strictly in accordance with law, preferably, within a stipulated period. 3. On the other hand, learned counsel for the State would oppose the submissions made by counsel for the petitioner. He would submit that the petitioner cannot claim promotion as a matter of right. He would submit that the petition deserves to be dismissed. 3 4. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the documents present on record. 5. Having considered the limited prayer made by learned counsel for the petitioner, this petition at this juncture is disposed of reserving liberty in favour of the petitioner to submit a detailed representation before respondent No.2 within a period of 30 days and in turn, the said authorities are directed to decide the same expeditiously, preferably, within a period of further 90 days, strictly in accordance with law. 6. With the aforesaid observation(s), this writ petition is disposed of. Sd/- (Rakesh Mohan Pandey) Judge Nimmi