1 2026:CGHC:19327 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPS No. 2663 of 2022 1 - Rajesh Kumar Tripathi S/o Valmiki Prasad Tripathi, Aged About 54 Years R/o Ward No. 1, Panchsheel Nagar, Baloda Bazar, District Baloda Bazar Bhatapara Chhattisgarh. ... Petitioner(s) versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Throuth The Secretary, School Education Department, Mantralaya, Mahanadi Bhawan, Atalo Nagar, Nava Raipur, District Raipur Chhattisgarh. 2 - State Of Chhattisgarh, Through The Development Department, Mantralaya, Mahanadi Bhawan, Atal Nagar, Nava Raipur, District Raipur Chhattisgarh. 3 - The Principal, Govt. Higher Secondary School, Palari, District Baloda Bazar Bhatapara Chhattisgarh. ... Respondent(s) For Petitioner : Ms. Ankita Goswami, Advocate holding the brief of Shri P.K. Patel, Advocate. For Respondents/ State : Mr. Abhuday Tripathi, P.L. Hon’ble Shri Justice Rakesh Mohan Pandey Judgment On Board 27.4.2026 1) By way of this petition, petitioner has sought following reliefs:- NIRMALA RAO 2 “10.1 That, this Hon'ble Court, may kindly call for the entire record in relates to the case of the petitioner. 10.2 That, this Hon'ble Court, may kindly be pleased to issued a writ / or writs / order / or orders / to direct the respondents. authorities, to decide the representation dated 15.03.2013 (Annexure P/1), within a stipulate period of time, in the ends of justice or further be pleased to appoint the petitioner on the post of Shiksha Karmi Grade-3, as per the circular of the state government, in the ends of justice. 10.3 That, any other relief, this Hon'ble Court, deem fit and proper may also kindly be granted to the petitioner, in the interest of justice.” 2) Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner worked as a part-time Vocational Teacher from 1990 to 1993 at the Government Higher Secondary School, Palari, District Baloda Bazar-Bhatapara. She would contend that the name of the petitioner was not considered for appointment on the post of Shiksha Karmi Grade-III, therefore, the petitioner made a representation before respondent No.1 on 15.3.2013 but till date, no decision has been taken. She would contend that a direction may be issued to respondent No.1 to decide the pending representation. 3) On the other hand, learned counsel appearing for the respondents would oppose. He would submit that the petitioner worked as a part-time Vocational Teacher from 1990 to 1993 and this petition has been preferred in the year 2022 without explaining the cause 3 of delay. It is also contended that the petitioner has no legal right to claim an appointment to the post of Shiksha Karmi Grade-III. 4) I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the documents placed on record. 5) Taking into consideration the limited prayer made by counsel for the petitioner, this petition is disposed of with a direction to respondent No.1 to decide the pending representation of the petitioner dated 15.3.2013 expeditiously and strictly in accordance with law. 6) With the aforesaid observation(s), this petition is disposed of. Sd/- (Rakesh Mohan Pandey) JUDGE Nimmi