Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Chhattisgarh · body

2026 DAILYLAW 4746 (CHH)

INDRESH SAHU v. STATE OF CHHATTISGARH

WPS/2982/2026 · 2026-04-05

Shri Parth Prateem Sahu

body2026

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

1 / 4 2026:CGHC:15502 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPS No. 2982 of 2026 1 - Indresh Sahu S/o Shri Lachhi Ram Sahu Aged About 50 Years Platoon Commander, R/o Ward No. 05, Chikhlimata, Near Pond, Rajnandgoan, P.S. Tahsil And District Rajnandgaon (C.G.) 2 - Ramesh Kunjam S/o Late Shir Hurra Kunjam Aged About 41 Years Head Constable 398, R/o. Village And Post- Jagargunda, Tahsil And P.S.- Konta, District- Sukma (C.G.) 3 - Mukesh Kumar S/o Shri Chandrajeet Prasad Aged About 36 Years Constabel No. 989, R/o. Krishna Nagar, Ward No. 56, Baghera, Durg, P.S. Tahsil And District- Durg (C.G.) 4 - Sanjay Kawasi S/o Shri Ramesh Kawasi Aged About 31 Years Constable No. 1058, R/o Village And Post- Ramaram, P.S.- Kerlapal, Tahsil And District- Sukma (C.G.) 5 - Salik Ram Dhruw S/o Shri Sharda Prasad Dhruw Aged About 37 Years Constable No. 1482, R/o. Arang Ward No. 11, P.S. And Tahsil - Pithaura, District- Mahasamund (C.G.) 6 - Subha Dhruva S/o Late Shri Shila Ram Dhruva Aged About 46 Years Constable No. 417, R/o Village And Post- Murliguda, Tahsil- Konta, District- Sukma (C.G.) 7 - Kattam Raju S/o Shri Kattam Singha Aged About 34 Years Constable No. 1013, R/o Village- Odenguda, Post- And P.S.- Errabor, District- Sukma (C.G.) 8 - Sonu Sariyam S/o Shri Sariyam Kosha Aged About 38 Years Constable No. 79, R/o. Village Medwai, Post Arkatt, P.S.- Dornapal, Tahsil- Konta, District- Sukma (C.G.) 2 / 4 9 - Madkam Bhima S/o Shri Madkam Ganga Aged About 43 Years Constable No. 1257, R/o. Village- Birla, Post- Maraiguda, P.S. - Errabor, Tahsil And District- Sukma (C.G.) ... Petitioner(s) Versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through It's Secretary, Department Of Home/ Police, Mahanadi Bhawan, Mantralaya, P.S. And Post- Rakhi, Atal Nagar Nava Raipur, District- Raipur (C.G.) 2 - Director General Of Police (Dgp) Police Headquarter (Phq), Sector-19, P.S. And Post, Rakhi, Atal Nager, Nava Raipur, District- Raipur, (C.G.) 3 - Additional Director General Of Police (Adgp) Administration, Office Of Adgp, Administration, Police Headquarter (Phq), Sector-19, P.S. And Post- Rakhi, Atal Nagar Nava Raipur, District, Raipur (C.G.) 4 - Additional Director General Of Police (Adgp) S.T.F./ Naxal Operation, Police Headquarter (Phq), Sector-19, P.S. And Post- Rakhi, Atal Nagar, Nava Raipur, District- Raipur (C.G.) 5 - Superintendent Of Police (Sp) Office Of Superintendent Of Police (Sp), Special Intelligence Branch (Sib), Police Headquarter (Phq), Sector-19, P.S. And Post- Rakhi, Atal Nagar, Nava Raipur, District- Raipur (C.G.) 6 - Superintendent Of Police (S.P.) Office Of Superintendent Of Police, Sukma District- Sukma (C.G.) ... Respondent(s) For Petitioners : Mr. Abhishek Pandey, Advocate with Mr. Rishabh Dev Sahu, Advocate For Respondent-State : Mr. Virendra Verma, G.A. Hon'ble Shri Parth Prateem Sahu, Judge ORDER ON BOARD 06.04.2026 1. Petitioners have filed this writ petition seeking following reliefs: “(I) That, this Hon’ble Court may kindly be pleased to direct the respondent authorities to produce all the relevant records relating to case of the petitioner before this Hon’ble Court for its kind perusal. 3 / 4 (ii) That, this Hon’ble Court may kindly be pleased to permit the petitioner to prefer representation before the Respondent No. 2 DGP, PHQ, Raipur and also before respondent No. 3 ADGP, Administration, PHQ, Raipur and also direct the respondent No. 2 and 3 to decide the representation of the petitioners for getting out of turn promotion to the petitioners on next higher post and also giving seniority and other consequential benefits to the petitioners. (iii) That this Hon’ble Court may further be pleased to direct respondents to give suitable compensation to the petitioners for the mental trauma and agony, harassment and hardships suffered by them as also cost of the litigation” 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is seeking a direction to the respondents to consider his claim for grant of, out of turn promotion to the next higher post of Assistant Sub Inspector (ASI) because he rendered exemplary services in terms of provision contained in Rule 56 (3) of the Special Armed Force Rules 1973 and Regulation 70 of the Police Regulations. 3. The petitioner’s claim is that the petitioner had participated in an naxal operation carried by the Armed Forces and Police Forces. The averment made in the petition are that many other police officers who had participated in the same or similar operation, have been granted aforesaid benefit but the petitioner has not been considered. 4. Learned counsel for the State would point out that the petitioner has filed this petition without preferring any representation. He would submit that if the petitioner prefer representation giving appropriate and relevant details of his claim, the competent authority under the Director General of Police shall examine and take appropriate decision within a reasonable time. 4 / 4 5. The provision contained in aforesaid two rules do make provision for consideration of cases of out of turn promotion in certain contingencies where the police officers claim to have rendered exemplary services in the manner and under the circumstances referred to in the rules. If that is the claim of the petitioner, the respondents are obliged under the law to examine the same whether the petitioners can be also granted those benefits. 6. Considering nature of grievance as raised by petitioner, I am of the opinion that the grievance of petitioner is to be first considered and decided at the ends of respondents. For the foregoing, the writ petition is disposed of permitting petitioner to submit comprehensive representation along with all relevant documents raising all grounds as raised in this writ petition before respondent No. 2 and 3 and in the event petitioner submit such representation, respondent no. 2 and 3 shall consider and decide the same, in accordance with law, expeditiously, preferably within three months from the date of receipt of representation. 7. With the aforesaid observation and direction, this writ petition stands disposed of. Sd/- (Parth Prateem Sahu) Saurabh JUDGE