Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Chhattisgarh · body

2026 DAILYLAW 3620 (CHH)

GYANENDRA KUMAR UPADHYAY v. CHHATTISGARH VIDHAN SABHA

WPS/809/2022 · 2026-04-08

Shri Rakesh Mohan Pandey

body2026

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

1 2026:CGHC:16402 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPS No. 809 of 2022 1 - Gyanendra Kumar Upadhyay S/o Late Ramsumiran Upadhyay Aged About 58 Years Director (Security) Chhattisgarh Vidhan Sabha Secretariat Raipur, District- Raipur (C.G.) ... Petitioner versus 1 - Chhattisgarh Vidhan Sabha Through- Principal Secretary, Vidhan Sabha Road, Raipur, District- Raipur (C.G.) 2 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through- Principal Secretary Law And Legislative Department, Mahanadi Bhawan, Atal Nagar, Raipur, District- Raipur (C.G.) 3 - Devendra Kumar Sharma Under Secretary, Chhattisgarh Vidhan Sabha Secretariat Raipur, District- Raipur (C.G.) ---- Respondents For petitioner : Mr. Parth Jha, Advocate holding the brief of Mr. T.K. Jha, Advocate For Respondent No.1 : Mr. Abhyuday Singh, Advocate For State : Mr. Anil S. Pandey, G.A. For respondent NO.3 : Ms. Sweksha Sharma, Advocate holding the brief of Mr. Prasoon Agrawal, Adv. Hon'ble Shri Justice Rakesh Mohan Pandey Order on Board 09.04.2026 1. The petitioner has filed this petition seeking following relief(s) : “10.1 That, this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to call for the entire records relating to this case. 10.2 That, this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to allow the petition and direct the respondent no.1 to set aside the promotion order dated 07.12.2021 of respondent no.3 and -2- promote the petitioner on the post of under secretary in the Vidhan Sabha Secretariat. 10.3 That any other relief, which this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper together with cost of the petition.” 2. It is informed that the petitioner as well as respondent No.3 have already retired from services on account of superannuation. It is also informed that the petitioner was promoted to the highest post in his cadre i.e. Director (Security). 3. Taking into consideration the above-discussed facts, in the opinion of this Court, no case is made out for interference. Consequently, this petition fails and is hereby dismissed. Sd/- (Rakesh Mohan Pandey) Judge Rekha