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) 8494

IN THE HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR
SUNITA PANDEY – Appellant
Versus
STATE OF CHHATTISGARH – Respondent
WPS/7614/2018



Digitally signed by AJINKYA PANSARE Date: NAFR

2026.04.16

14:10:54 +0530 HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPS No. 7614 of 2018  Sunita Pandey W/o Girdhary Lal Pandey, Aged About 49 Years Working As Sanitary Daroga At Municipal Council, Dipka, Ps Dipka District Korba Chhattisgarh, District : Korba, Chhattisgarh ... Petitioner(s)

versus

1. State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Secretary, Department Of Local Self Government, Mahanadi Mantralaya, Naya Raipur, Post Office And Police Station Naya Raipur, District Raipur Chhattisgarh, District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh

2. Municipal Council, Dipka, Through Chief Municipal Officer, Dipka, District Korba Chhattisgarh, District : Korba, Chhattisgarh

3. Joint Director, Urban Administration And Development, Regional Office, Bilaspur Chhattisgarh, District : Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh

4. Commissioner, Urban Administration And Development, Raipur Chhattisgarh, District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh

5. Collector, Korba, District Korba Chhattisgarh, District : Korba, Chhattisgarh

6. Chairman/president District Selection Committee, Municipal Council, Dipka, District Korba Chhattisgarh, District : Korba, Chhattisgarh

7. Anju Patel, Sanitary Inspector, Municipal Council, Dipka, Ps Dipka, District Korba Chhattisgarh, District : Korba, Chhattisgarh ... Respondent(s)

For Petitioner : Mr. Vikash Pandey, Advocate For State : Mr. Topilal Bareth, P.L For Respondent : Mr. Arman Memon, Advocate on behalf of, No. 2 Mr. Syed Majid Ali, Advocate Hon’ble Shri Justice Rakesh Mohan Pandey

Order On Board

16.4.2026

1) By way of this petition, petitioner has sought following reliefs:-

i. That, this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to quash the impugned order dated 5/10/2018 (Annexure P/1) bearing No.F 4-08/2018/18 passed by the respondent No.1, in respect of the respondent No.7.

ii. to That, this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased direct the respondent authorities to consider the case of the petitioner and grant her promotion to the post of Sanitary Inspector from the date of her actual entitlement with all consequential benefits including the monetary benefits.

iii. Cost of the petition may also be granted to the petitioner.

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

2) Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that initially petitioner was appointed to the post of Sanitary Daroga under respondent No. 2 vide order dated 25.2.2009. He further submits that according to service rules, petitioner is eligible and entitled for promotion to the post of Sanitary Inspector and her name was recommended by Chief Municipal Officer, Municipal Council, Dipka in its resolution dated 23.2.2017 but till date, no decision has been taken yet and name of respondent No. 7 is being considered for the promoted post. He contends that respondent authorities may be directed to consider the name of petitioner for promotion to the post of Sanitary Inspector.

3) On the other hand, learned counsel appearing for the respective respondents would oppose. They submit that requisite qualifications for appointment to the post of Sanitary Inspector are B.Sc. Degree in Biology subject from any recognized university and Diploma in Sanitary Inspector course from any recognized institute whereas petitioner is a graduate in arts stream therefore her name was not considered for promotion to the post of Sanitary Inspector. They further submit that this petition is misconceived and deserves to be dismissed.

4) At this stage, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner may be permitted to make a detailed representation before respondent No. 2 in light of recommendation dated 23.2.2017.

5) Heard.

6) Taking into consideration the limited grievance of the petitioner, this petition is hereby being disposed reserving liberty in favor of petitioner to prefer a representation within period of 45 days from today before respondent No. 2, who in turn is directed to consider and deci

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