1 / 2 2026:CGHC:16139 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPS No. 655 of 2024 Santosh Dwivedi S/o Lakhanlal Dwivedi Aged About 45 Years Working As Teacher (Lb) Posted At Government Middle School, Kuruwar, Sankul Tenganmada, Block Kota, District Bilaspur (C.G.) ... Petitioner(s) Versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Secretary, Department Of School Education, Mahanadi Bhawan, Mantralaya, Atal Nagar Nava Raipur, District Raipur (C.G.) 2 - Director Public Instructions, Indrawati Bhawan, Mantralay, Atal Nagar, Nava Raipur, District Raipur (C.G.) 3 - Joint Director School Education Department, Bilaspur Education Division, Bilaspur, District Bilaspur (C.G.) 4 - District Education Officer Bilaspur, District Bilaspur (C.G.) ... Respondent(s) For Petitioner : Mr. Yash Mishra, Advocate on behalf of Mr. Adity Sharma, Advocate For Respondents : Ms. Apoorva Nigam, P.L. HON'BLE SHRI PARTH PRATEEM SAHU, JUDGE ORDER ON BOARD 08.04.2026 1. The petitioner has filed this writ petition seeking following reliefs. “i. To kindly call for the records of the case from the respondents. PAWAN KUMAR JHA Digitally signed by PAWAN KUMAR JHA 2 / 2 ii. To kindly be pleased to direct the respondents to consider the representation of the petitioner within a stipulated time frame work treating him similar situated person in light of order passed in WPS No. 6253/2023 & WPS No. 7033/2023. iii. To kindly make any other order that may be deemed fit and just in the facts and circumstances of the case..” 2. Counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner has earlier submitted representation before the respondent No. 3 seeking the relief as claimed in this writ petition, which till date is not decided, therefore, the writ petition is filed. He submits that at this stage he is not pressing this petition on merits and is only seeking a direction to respondent No. 3 to consider and take decision on the claim of the petitioner, at the earliest, within specified time frame. 3. Counsel for the State submits that in view of the limited prayer made by counsel for the petitioner, he is having no objection. 4. On due consideration of the submissions made by learned counsel for the parties, the writ petition at this stage is disposed of directing the Respondent No. 3 to consider and take decision on the representation dated 03.01.2024 (wrongly mentioned in the date column of the representation on 03.01.2023), in accordance with law, expeditiously, preferably within a further period of three months from the date of receipt of the Order. 5. Accordingly, this writ petition is disposed of with the aforesaid observation and direction. Sd/- (Parth Prateem Sahu) Saurabh JUDGE