1 2026:CGHC:15962 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPS No. 3066 of 2026 1 - Dev Narayan Kashyap S/o Late Ram Bhuvan Kashyap Aged About 58 Years Presently Posted As The Commissioner, Municipal Corporation, Ambikapur, District - Surguja Chhattisgarh ... Petitioner versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Secretary General Administration Department, Mantralaya, New Raipur, District Raipur Chhattisgarh 2 - Secretary Forest And Climate Change Department, Mahanadi Bhavan, Nava Raipur, Atal Nagar, District Raipur Chhattisgarh 3 - Departmental Promotion Committee Through Its Chairperson, Forest And Climate Change Department Mahanadi Bhavan, Nava Raipur, Atal Nagar, District Raipur Chhattisgarh 4 - Mrs. Richa Sharma Additional Chief Secretary, Forest And Climate Change Department, Chhattisgarh Government, Raipur Chhattisgarh ... Respondent(s) (Cause title is taken from CIS) For Petitioner : Mr. Bhupendra Singh, Advocate For Respondents-State : Ms. Poorva Tiwari, Panel Lawyer SB: Hon'ble Shri Parth Prateem Sahu, Judge RAVI SHANKAR MANDAVI Digitally signed by RAVI SHANKAR MANDAVI Date: 2026.04.15 16:32:30 +0530 2 Order on Board 08/04/2026 1. Petitioner has filed this writ petition seeking following reliefs:- “10.1 That the Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to issue a Writ of Certiorari or any other appropriate writ, order, or direction to quash and set aside the Impugned Order No. ESTB- 102(1)/10/2026-GAD-4 dated 09.02.2026 (Annexure P/1), and quash the DPC Proceedings/Minutes dated 03.02.2026 in respect of the Petitioner, on the grounds of procedural impropriety and institutional bias.to the extent that it excludes the Petitioner from promotion to the Senior Selection Grade (Level 15) and declares him "Unfit." 10.2 That the Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to issue a Writ of Certiorari or any other appropriate writ to quash and set aside the adverse numerical grading of "2.00" (Grade D) and the accompanying adverse remarks recorded by Respondent No. 3 in the Petitioner's Annual Confidential Report (ACR) for the period 01.04.2024 to 28.10.2024, being arbitrary, biased, and contradictory to the Government's own regularization order. 10.3 That the Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to issue a Writ of Mandamus or any other appropriate writ, directing the Respondents to hold a Review Departmental Promotion Committee (Review DPC) to re-consider the Petitioner's case for promotion to the Senior Selection Grade (Level 15) by ignoring the impugned Grade 'D' and instead considering his overall unblemished service record and promote the Petitioner to the Senior Selection Grade (Level 15) with retrospective effect from 01.01.2026 from the date on which his juniors and batchmates were promoted, with all consequential benefits including seniority, arrears of pay, and interest thereon. 3 10.4 That the Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to grant any other relief which this Hon'ble Court deems fit and proper may also kindly be granted to the petitioners, in the interest of justice.” 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submit that the petitioner became eligible for consideration of his name for grant of senior selection grade, the name of the petitioner was also considered by the Committee constituted in this regard, however, considering the award of grade ‘D’ in the last 6 months of the relevant period of 5 years, he was not awarded senior selection grade. Petitioner came to know that the authority concerned had initially awarded grade, however, the Reviewing Authority has lowered down the grade awarded to the petitioner and made it ‘D’, aggrieved with which the petitioner has already submitted a representation before the respondent No.4 which is pending consideration and therefore, the petitioner in this writ petition has also challenged non- award of the senior selection grade to the petitioner. Upon putting question as to why respondent No.4 has been impleaded in a personal capacity as a party respondent, he submits that the respondent No.4 is Reviewing Authority and according to instruction due to some personal grudge she degraded the petitioner. 3. Learned counsel for the State/respondents would submit that in the aforementioned facts and circumstances of the case, if the petitioner aggrieved with the action on the part of respondent 4 No.4, than the petitioner has to submit representation before the higher authorities so that the representation to be submitted by the petitioner can be considered in an appropriate manner. At this stage, the counsel for the petitioner submits that he may be permitted to submit a fresh comprehensive representation along with all supporting documents before respondent No.1 and the respondent No.1 be directed to consider and take decision on the said representation at the earliest within a specified time frame. 4. On due consideration of submissions made by counsel for the respective parties, this writ petition at this stage is disposed of permitting the petitioner to submit a fresh comprehensive representation before the respondent No.1 along with all supporting documents and if such a representation is submitted before the respondent No.1, the same shall be considered and decided in accordance with law expeditiously preferably within a further period of two months from the date of receipt of representation in an objective manner. 5. With the aforesaid observation and direction, this writ petition stands finally disposed of. Sd/- (Parth Prateem Sahu) Judge Ravi Mandavi