##PAGE1##

1

Digitally

signed

by

SHAYNA

KADRI

NAFR

HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR

Reserved for orders on : 10.12.2025

Order passed on: 19.12.2025

WPS No. 3096 of 2023

1 - Santosh Kumar Shriwas S/o Shri Rammanorath Aged About 42

Years Working As Lecturer (L.B.) And Posted At Government Higher

Secondary School Karga, Block Kurud, District Dhamtari Chhattisgarh

... Petitioner(s)

versus

1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through Secretary, Department Of School

Education, Mahanadi Bhawan, Mantralaya New Raipur, District Raipur

Chhattisgarh

2 - Director Directorate Of Chhattisgarh Public Instruction, Indravati

Bhawan, Naya Raipur, District Raipur Chhattisgarh

3 - District Education Officer, Dhamtari, District Dhamtari Chhattisgarh

4 - Block Education Officer, Block Kurud, District Dhamtari Chhattisgarh

... Respondent(s)

(Cause Title is taken from CIS System)

For Petitioner : Mr. G. P. Mathur and Mr. Sashi Kumar

Kushwaha, Advocates

For State : Mr. Rahul Tamaskar, Govt. Advocate

2

Hon’ble Mr. Justice Amitendra Kishore Prasad

C.A.V. Order

1. The petition has been filed stating that the petitioner’s earlier

service from 16.06.2010, arising from the same advertisement

and selection process for Shiksha Karmi Grade-2 and Grade-1,

was not counted for absorption solely due to the alleged absence

of an NOC, despite the fact that no NOC was required in such

circumstances. Under the Government policy, teachers

completing eight years of service as on 13.07.2018 are entitled to

absorption from that date, but the petitioner’s name was wrongly

omitted from the list. Although he was later absorbed from

01.07.2019, he had already completed eight years before

01.07.2018 and thus qualifies for absorption from 13.07.2018.

Aggrieved by this denial of legitimate seniority and financial

benefits, the present petition has been filed seeking following

reliefs : -

“10.1 That, this Hon'ble Court may kindly

be pleased to direct the respondent

authorities to consider representation

and to grant benefit of absorption from

01.07.2018 as per policy of the State

Govt. and to modify absorption order

accordingly within stipulated time, in the

interest of justice.

10.2 Any other relief which may be

suitable în the facts and circumstances

of the case, may also be granted.”

3

2. The brief facts of the case are that The petitioner is a citizen of

India and entitled to the fundamental rights guaranteed under Part

III of the Constitution. On 07.10.2009, the State Government

issued a joint advertisement inviting applications for the posts of

Shiksha Karmi Grade-2 and Grade-1, pursuant to which the

petitioner applied for both categories. A common merit list was

prepared, which was later bifurcated into separate lists for Grade-

2 and Grade-1 candidates. In the first instance, the petitioner was

selected for the post of Shiksha Karmi Grade-2 and was

appointed by order dated 16.06.2010, joining his duties on

24.06.2010 at Zila Panchayat, Dhamtari. As his name was also

placed in the waiting list for Shiksha Karmi Grade-1, he was

subsequently selected and appointed to that higher post by order

dated 07.09.2010, and he joined on 14.09.2010 at the same Zila

Panchayat. Under the State Government’s policies dated

30.06.2018 and 13.07.2018, teachers who had completed eight

years of service as on 13.07.2018 became entitled to absorption

in the School Education Department with effect from that date,

and the policies specifically provided that past service rendered

on a lower post would be counted for computing the eight-year

period. The policy further clarified that teachers who had either

obtained an NOC or had submitted an application for NOC would

also receive the benefit of past service. The petitioner asserts that

both his appointments were made under the same advertisement

and selection process, and therefore, seeking an NOC from the

“earlier” post was neither required nor logically applicable. Despite

4

this, the authorities refused to count his service from 16.06.2010

on the ground that he had not produced an NOC or a receipt

showin