1 CGHC010206362021 2026:CGHC:38096 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPS No. 4404 of 2021 1 - Jaishankar Jatav S/o Late Jodharam Jatav Aged About 50 Years Rural Agriculture Extension Officer At Office Of Deputy Director Agriculture, Balodabazar, District Balodabazar Bhatapara, Chhattisgarh. 2 - Siyaram Hirwani S/o Late Mohar Sai Hirwani Aged About 48 Years Rural Agriculture Extension Officer At Office Of Senior Agriculture Development Officer, Bhatapara, District Balodabazar Bhatapara, Chhattisgarh. 3 - Olim Mary Kujur W/o Yujin Kujur Aged About 46 Years Rural Agriculture Extension Officer At Office Of Senior Agriculture, Development Officer Simga, District Balodabazar Bhatapara, Chhattisgarh. 4 - Bachchi Lal Prajapati S/o Shri Khunni Lal Prajapati Aged About 43 Years Rural Agriculture Extension Officer At Office Of Senior Agriculture, Development Officer Bhatapara, District Balodabazar Bhatapara, Chhattisgarh. 5 - Bhuwan Kumar Mandavi S/o Late Shivlal Mandavi Aged About 48 Years Rural Agriculture Extension Officer At Office Of Senior Agriculture, Development Officer Palari, District Balodabazar Bhatapara, Chhattisgarh. 6 - Bhagwat Satnami S/o Late Budhram Satnami Aged About 50 Years Rural Agriculture Extension Officer At Office Of Senior Agriculture, Development Officer Simga, District Balodabazar Bhatapara, Chhattisgarh. 7 - Kamal Narayan Bharatwaj S/o Shri Kamta Prasad Bharatwaj Aged About 43 Years Rural Agriculture Extension Officer At Office Of Senior Agriculture Development Officer Simga, District Balodabazar Bhatapara, Chhattisgarh. 8 - Smt. Fekan Bai Jangde W/o Late Shri Ramkumar Jangde Aged About 51 Years Rural Agriculture Extension Officer At Office Of Senior Agriculture Development Officer Bilaigarh, District Balodabazar Bhatapara, Chhattisgarh. 2 9 - Smt. Anjana Ratre W/o Shri Pushuram Ratre Aged About 47 Years Rural Agriculture Extension Officer At Office Of Senior Agriculture Development Officer Palari, District Balodabazar Bhatapara, Chhattisgarh. ... Petitioner(s) versus 1 - State of Chhattisgarh Through The Secretary, Department of Agriculture, Mahanadi Bhawan, Mantralaya, Atal Nagar, Raipur, District Raipur, Chhattisgarh. 2 - The Director Directorate Of Agriculture Department Chhattisgarh Raipur, Krishi Vikas Bhawan, Sector-19, District Raipur, Chhattisgarh. ... Respondent(s) For Petitioner(s) : Mr. A. S. Rajput, Advocate For Respondent(s)/State : Mr. RCS Deo, Panel Lawyer Hon’ble Shri Justice Rakesh Mohan Pandey Order on Board 25/08/2026 1. The petitioners have filed this petition seeking the following relief(s):- “10.1 That, this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to direct the respondent authorities to call equal number of names from feeder cadre of agricultural graduate and non agriculture graduate and Annexure P-1 may be quashed, in the interest of justice. 10.2 Any other relief deemed fit in the facts and circumstances of the case may also be granted.” 2. In this writ petition, the petitioners, who are working as Rural Agricultural Extension Officers (RAEOs), have challenged the letter dated 08.12.2020 (Annexure-P/01), whereby the respondents have sought ACRs and other service records of eligible RAEOs for filling up the vacant posts of Agricultural Development Officer (ADO) by promotion. The petitioners, being non-Agricultural graduates, have raised a grievance that the respondents have called for the ACRs of 510 Agricultural graduates as against only 78 non-Agricultural graduates and, therefore, have acted contrary to the amended Recruitment Rules. 3 3. However, a careful perusal of the letter dated 08.12.2020 would show that the same is only a step taken by the respondents in the process of filling up the vacant posts of Agricultural Development Officer from the feeder cadre of Rural Agricultural Extension Officers, comprising both Agricultural and non-Agricultural graduates. The respondents have merely called for the ACRs and other relevant service records, including details of immovable assets and pending criminal proceedings, for the purpose of undertaking the promotional exercise. 4. Merely because the respondents have called for the records of 510 Agricultural graduates and 78 non-Agricultural graduates, it cannot, at this stage, be held that the respondents have finally determined the zone of consideration or denied the petitioners their right of consideration in terms of the amended Recruitment Rules. The impugned letter, by itself, does not confer or take away any right of promotion and cannot be said to be contrary to the Chhattisgarh Subordinate Agricultural Class-III (Non-Ministerial) Service Recruitment Rules, 2010. 5. In that view of the matter, I do not find any good ground to interfere with the impugned letter dated 08.12.2020. The writ petition is accordingly dismissed. However, liberty is reserved in favour of the petitioners to raise their grievance at the appropriate stage, if the final promotional exercise is found to have been undertaken contrary to the applicable Recruitment Rules. No order as to costs. Sd/- Rakesh Mohan Pandey JUDGE Nadim