2026:CGHC:3719 NAFR Digitally HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR AVINASHsigned by SHARMA AVINASH SHARMA WPS No. 3843 of 2023 Anand Kumar Lahre S/o Late T.R. Lahre, Aged About 55 Years R/o Balaji Villa, Near Adarsh School, Near Adarsh Nagar, Mowa, Raipur, District-Raipur, (C.G.).

... Petitioner.

versus

1 - Chhattisgarh Rajya Sahkari Bank Maryadit Through Its Prabhari Managing Director, Head Office Sahakar Bhawan, Plot No.-74, Sector 24, Nava Raipur, Atal Nagar, Raipur, District Raipur (C.G.).

2 - Ajay Bhagat, S/o Late Lt Bhagat, Aged About 49, At Present Working As General Manger ( Special Category), Chhattisgarh Rajya Sahkari Bank Maryadit, Head Office Sahkar Bhawan, Plot No.- 74, Sector 24, Nava Raipur, Atal Nagar, Raipur District- Raipur, (C.G.).

.. Respondents.

For Petitioner : Shri Shobhit Koshta, Advocate.

For Respondent : Shri Jitendra Pali, Advocate.

No.1 For Respondent : Ms. Shivangi Agrawal appears on behalf of Shri No.2 Anurag Singh, Advocates. Hon’ble Mr. Justice Amitendra Kishore Prasad

Order on Board

21/01/2026

1. By way of this Writ Petition, petitioner has sought following reliefs:-

10.1 That, the Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to issue appropriate writ and quash and set-aside the impugned orders dated 17/7/20 and 27/5/20 (Annexure P-3) in the interest of justice.

10.2 That, the Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to issue appropriate writ and direct the respondents to take a decision in respect of the petitioner representation as early as possible preferably within such outer limit as Hon'ble court may deem fit in light of facts and circumstances of the case.

10.3 This Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to call for the entire records for kind perusal of this Hon'ble Court.

10.4 Any other relief which this Hon'ble Court deem fit and proper may also kindly be granted to the petitioner in the interest of justice.

2. Necessary facts are that petitioner was initially appointed on the post of Sub-Engineer in the office of Madhya Pradesh Police Housing Corporation Limited in the erstwhile State of Madhya Pradesh vide order dated 10.01.1995. On 20.02.2014, petitioner was appointed to the post of Grade-1 Manager. As per seniority list on 31.03.2019, petitioner was the senior most and hence most suitable person eligible for promotion. In the year 2020, the respondent authorities conducted Department Promotion Committee for the purposes of promotion and petitioner was the senior most person eligible for promotion from Grade -1 Manager to General Manager (Special Category). However, to the surprise of the petitioner, he was not promoted and the Respondent No.2 being in S. No.6 was granted the promotional post. Petitioner came to know that someone junior to him has been promoted and it was orally informed to the petitioner that he was not promoted as his Annual Confidential Report (ACR) was not satisfactory.

3. Counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner could not get promoted only because his ACR was not up to the mark as required for promotion of petitioner to the post of Assistant General Manager (Special Category), Chhattisgarh Rajya Sahkari Bank Maryadit. He further submits that the ACR was not communicated to the petitioner and such, he was not aware about the fact that he does not possess the requisite quality of ACR.

4. Learned counsel for Respondent No.1 submits that ACR of the petitioner was graded as “Good” and as such, it was not communicated to the petitioner. However, on the basis of said ACR, petitioner could not get promotion as it did not fulfill the eligibility criteria and the prescribed benchmark.

5. Learned counsel for Respondent No.2 submits that Respondent No.2 was promoted after following due process of law. She submits that the petitioner is illegally raising dispute which is not required to be considered by this Court since right accrued in favour of Respondent No.2.

6. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the material available on record.

7. It is a well-settled principle of