Chattisgarh High Court
Amar Singh Sahu vs State Of Chhattisgarh 18 Wps/3243/2010 ... on 28 August, 2018
Author: P. Sam Koshy
Bench: P. Sam Koshy
1
NAFR
HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR
WPS No. 5538 of 2018
Amar Singh Sahu S/o Chhabilal Sahu, aged about 40 years, presently
posted and working as Teacher (Local Body) Govt. Middle School
Alivara, Block Chhuria, District Rajnandgaon (C.G.).
---Petitioner
Versus
1. State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Secretary, Department Of
Panchayat And Rural Development, Mahanadi Bhawan, Mantralaya,
Naya Raipur, Post Office And Police Station Naya Raipur, District
Raipur Chhattisgarh.
2. State Of Chhattisgarh, Through The Secretary, Department Of School
Education, Mahanadi Bhawan, Mantralaya, Naya Raipur, Post Office
And Police Station Naya Raipur, District Raipur, Chhattisgarh.
3. The Collector, Rajnandgaon, District Rajnandgaon Chhattisgarh.
4. Chief Executive Officer, Zila Panchayat Rajnandgaon, District
Rajnandgaon Chhattisgarh.
5. Chief Executive Officer, Janpad Panchayat, Block Chhuria, District
Rajnandgaon Chhattisgarh.
---Respondents
For petitioner : Shri Shaleen Singh Baghel, Advocate. For respondents : Shri Ratan Pusty, Government Advocate.
Hon'ble Shri Justice P. Sam Koshy Order on Board 28/08/2018
1. Heard on admission.
2. The grievance ventilated through this petition is on account of non- consideration of petitioner's case for promotion on the next higher post of Teacher (Panchayat).
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is in public employment with avenue of promotion provided under the Govt. recruitment 2 rules known as Chhattisgarh Teacher (Panchayat) Cadre (Recruitment and Conditions of Service) Rules, 2012. It is submitted that the petitioner has completed minimum eligibility of 7 years and large number of posts of Teacher (Panchayat) are lying vacant. The petitioner enjoys a very high position in the seniority list and is therefore within the zone of consideration. However, till date, respondents have not considered the case of the petitioner for promotion.
4. Learned counsel for the State submits that this grievance can be ventilated by the petitioner invoking the remedy of statutory representation to the competent authority as provided under Rule 18 (1) (b) of the Panchayat Service (Discipline and Appeal) Rules, 1999 (for short "the Rules of 1999 "). A perusal of the aforesaid Rule clearly provides that a member of the Panchayat Service may make representation against an order which amongst others, denies promotion to a higher post or service to which is otherwise eligible according to recruitment rules and which is due to her in accordance to seniority.
5. This Court, in similar cases, has already disposed off the petition with a direction to consider representation in terms of statutory rules.
6. Accordingly, this petition is also disposed off with a direction that in case the petitioner prefers representation, the same shall be considered and decided by the authority by speaking order within a period of 6 months from the date of receipt of representation.
Sd/-
(P. Sam Koshy)
Sumit JUDGE