SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2026 Supreme(Online)(Chh) 5061

IN THE HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR
RATNESH DUBEY – Appellant
Versus
STATE OF CHHATTISGARH – Respondent
WPS/5075/2023



Digitally 2026:CGHC:8311 signed by SHAYNA NAFR KADRI HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPS No. 5075 of 2023

1 - Ratnesh Dubey S/o Shankar Prasad Dubey, Aged About 58 Years Saraju Bagicha, C.B. Heights, Bilaspur District Bilaspur (Chhattisgarh)

... Petitioner(s)

versus

1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through Its Secretary, Department School, Mahanadi Bhawan, Atal Nagar, Raipur (Chhattisgarh)

2 - Director, Public Education Directorate, Raipur District Raipur Chhattisgarh.

3 - District Education Officer, District Bilaspur (Chhattisgarh)

... Respondent(s)

(Cause-title is taken from Case Information System) For Petitioner : Mr. K. P. S. Gandhi, Advocate For State : Mr. Arpit Agrawal, Panel Lawyer SB- Hon'ble Shri Justice Amitendra Kishore Prasad

Order on Board

16/02/2026

1. The present writ petition is being filed seeking following reliefs:-

“10.1That this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to issue a writ of mandamus to the respondents authorities for issuing the promotion order's prior to deciding the objections of the seniority or the petitioner on the gradation list.

10.2 That this Hon'ble Court may issue a direction or orders to the respondent no. 2 to count the seniority of the petitioner from the date of her initial appointment dated 10.07.1998 thereafter placed her name accordingly on the proper place of the gradation list as per rule 12(2)(c) of the Chhattisgarh civil services (recruitment and condition) Rules 1961.

10.3 Any other relief may also be granted in the favour petitioner as may deem fit by this Hon'ble Court as per the facts and circumstances of the case.”

2. Facts of the case, in brief, is that the petitioner was initially appointed by direct recruitment to the post of Shiksha Karmi Grade I vide order dated 10.07.1998 and was posted at Government Higher Secondary School, Pamgarh, District Bilaspur, pursuant to which he joined and rendered continuous service. Upon successful completion of the prescribed probation period, he was duly confirmed on the said post by the competent appointing authority vide confirmation order dated 04.04.2002. Thereafter, by transfer order dated 28.09.2007, the petitioner was transferred from Government Higher Secondary School, Pamgarh, District Bilaspur to Government Higher Secondary School, Koni. Subsequently, in light of the policy decision of the State Government and the circular dated 30.06.2018 issued by respondent No.1 providing for absorption of Shiksha Karmis who had completed eight years of service into the School Education Department, the District Education Officer issued an absorption order dated 01.07.2018, whereby the services of the petitioner were absorbed in the Education Department. After such absorption, a provisional gradation list of Lecturers (L.B.) for District Bilaspur was issued for the first time on 01.04.2023, and objections were invited vide official communication dated 14.10.2022; however, while determining seniority, the respondents counted the petitioner’s seniority from 28.09.2007 instead of from his initial date of appointment i.e. 10.07.1998, thereby ignoring the period of service rendered from 10.07.1998 to 28.09.2007 and placing his name at Sr. No. 1222 in the impugned gradation list below his juniors. Aggrieved thereby, the petitioner submitted a detailed representation claiming that his seniority ought to be reckoned from the date of his initial appointment in terms of Rule 12(2)(c) of the Chhattisgarh Civil Services (Recruitment and Conditions) Rules, 1961 governing determination of inter se seniority between direct recruits and absorbed employees; however, despite submission of objections, the respondents have neither decided the same nor finalized the gradation list, and have allegedly proceeded to initiate promotions from the post of Lecturer (L.B.) to Principal without adjudicating the petitioner’s claim, thereby depriving him of consequential service benefits and prompting the filing of the present petition.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top