Chattisgarh High Court
Latif Kumar Nirala vs State Of Chhattisgarh on 5 May, 2026
Author: Parth Prateem Sahu
Bench: Parth Prateem Sahu
1
2026:CGHC:21046
NAFR
HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR
ALFIZA
BAIG
Digitally signed
by ALFIZA BAIG
WPS No. 3874 of 2026
Date: 2026.05.08
11:01:38 +0530
Latif Kumar Nirala S/o Shri Lakhan Lal Nirala Aged About 36 Years
Occupation Service, Presently Posted As Data Entry Operator Tahsil Office
Sheorinarayan, Distt. Janjgir Champa, Chhattisgarh.
... Petitioner
versus
1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through Secretary, Department Of Revenue And
Disaster Management, Mahanadi Bhawan, Mantralaya, Naya Raipur, Distt.
Raipur, Chhattisgarh.
2 - Collector Janjgir, Distt. Janjgir Champa, Chhattisgarh.
3 - Sub Divisional Officer (Revenue) Sheorinarayan, Distt. Janjgir Champa,
Chhattisgarh.
4 - Tahsildar Sheorinarayan, Distt. Janjgir Champa, Chhattisgarh.
5 - Shri Tekendra Nuruti (The Then Tahsildar Sheorinarayan) Presently
Posted As Tahsildar, Baloda, Distt. Janjgir Champa, Chhattisgarh.
6 - Shri Pankaj Kumar Khutle Peon (Process Server), Office Of Tahsildar
Sheorinarayan, Distt. Janjgir Champa, Chhattisgarh.
... Respondents
For Petitioner : Mr. Sunil Sahu, Advocate
For State : Mr. Shahil Singh, Panel lawyer
2
Hon'ble Shri Justice Parth Prateem Sahu
Order On Board
05.05.2026
1. Petitioner has filed this writ petition seeking following reliefs:-
"10.1That the Hon'ble Court may be pleased to call for the entire records which relates to issuance of the impugned orders from the office of respondent no. 3 to 5.
10.2 That, this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to issue an appropriate writ by quashing the impugned order dated 25.02.2026 (Annexure P-1) and order dated 03.03.2026, 20.03.2026 (Annexure P-2) which relates to allotment of work of Reader to Class - IV employee in the Tahsil Office Sheorinarayan.
10.3 That the this Hon'ble Court may kindly be please to direct the respondent no. 2 to consider and decide the representation of the petitioner dated 13.04.2026 (Annexure P-9) as early as possible.
10.4 Any other relief, which this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper, may also be passed in favor of the petitioner together with cost of the petition."
2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner is a Class-III employee and is posted in Tehsil Office Sheorinarayan, Distt. Janjgir Champa (C.G.) on the post of Data Entry Operator. Earlier when petitioner was transferred from Tehsil Office Baloda, District - Janjgir Champa, (C.G.) vide order dated 14.08.2024 (Annexure P-4). Petitioner was directed by the then Tahsildar under Work distribution to work as Assistant Reader along with other duties assigned to him. Since 20th of September, 2024 petitioner continued to work as Reader to Tahsildar along with others and has also discharged his duties 3 assigned to him. The concerned Tahsildar was transferred vide order dated 25.02.2026 (Annexure P-7) from the office of Tahsildar Sheorinaryan to office of Tahsildar Baloda. On the same date concerned Tahsildar issued the work distribution memo/order in which the work of Reader has been assigned to respondent no. 6 who is a Class-IV employee (working as Process Server). He further submits that being Reader of Tahsildar the employee working as Reader to Tahsildar has to communicate the direction issued by Tahsildar from time to time and therefore, employees like petitioner who are holding post of Assistant Grade - III or the Computer Operator has to comply with the directions issued by the Class- IV employee. Petitioner thereafter submitted an application and raised grievance before Sub Divisional Officer (Revenue)and the Sub Divisional Officer (Revenue) also has not corrected the mistake which has been committed by the Tahsildar of assigning the work of Reader to Class-IV employee. Petitioner has already submitted representation before Collector, Janjgir Champa on 13.04.2026 vide Annexure P-9, raising his grievance which is pending consideration, therefore, direction be issued to respondent no. 2 to consider and take decision on the same.
3. Learned counsel for State submits that in view of the observation made by this Court in pre-lunch session, he has obtained instructions and according to his instructions as no other employee is available, the work of Reader of Tahsildar has been assigned to respondent no.
6.
4. Heard learned counsel for the respective parties and perused the documents enclosed along with this writ petition. 4
5. It is not disputed by respondent-State that respondent no. 6 is holding the post of Class-IV employee. The work of Reader to Tahsildar is an important work for which the employee should at least be holding minimum Class- III post. From the work distribution memo which is enclosed with this writ petition would show that in the office there are two employees holding the post of Assistant Grade-III and the petitioner is holding the post of Data Entry Operator. If for any reason the petitioner who is holding the post of Data Entry Operator is to be assigned some other work then the authorities could have directed anyone of the two AG-III employee posted to work as Reader to Tahsildar.
6. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and further considering the fact that petitioner has already submitted representation before respondent no. 2, I find it appropriate to dispose of this writ petition at this stage, directing respondent no. 2 to consider and take decision and to pass appropriate orders on the representation submitted by petitioner, in accordance with law, expeditiously, preferably within a further period of ten days from the date of receipt of the order.
7. With the aforesaid observation and direction, this writ petition stands disposed of.
Certified copy as per rules. sd/-
Alfiza (Parth Prateem Sahu)
Judge