Back
2026 Supreme(Online)(Chh) 25298
HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR
Rakesh Mohan Pandey, J
Tribhuwan Lal Sahu – Appellant
Versus
State Of Chhattisgarh – Respondent
WPS No. 3072 of 2018|WPS No. 3081 of 2018|WPS No. 3084 of 2018|WPS No. 3173 of 2018
For the Appellants/Petitioners: Prasoon Agrawal
For the Respondents: Vivek Siddharth Ojha, Keshav Dewangan
The court directed the respondent authority to decide representations regarding the seniority of Assistant Teachers in light of the applicable service rules and relevant judicial precedents concerning the effect of transfers on seniority.
Headnote:(A) Service Law - Seniority List - Challenge to the placement of transferred employees above original appointees in the gradation list - Seniority should be determined in accordance with the applicable recruitment and service rules. (Para 2)
Issues: Whether the seniority list prepared by the respondent authority is in accordance with Rule 27 of the Chhattisgarh Panchayat Service (Recruitment and General Conditions of Service) Rules 1999.
Order on Board
1. The petitioners have filed these petitions seeking the following relief(s):-
“10.1 That, the Hon’ble Court may kindly be pleased to issue the writ / writs, order / orders, direction / directions issue an appropriate writ in the nature of mandamus and quash the impugned seniority list and direct the respondent authority to prepare a fresh seniority list in accordance with law.
10.2 Grant any other relief, which is deemed fit in the circumstances of the case.”
2. Mr. Prasoon Agrawal, learned counsel appearing for the petitioners would contend that the petitioners were appointed to the posts of Assistant Teacher under the respondent No. 4 in the year 2006 and 2007. He would submit that the services of the private respondents were transferred on their own expenses to the Zila Panchayat, Daundilohara and they have been placed above the petitioners in gradation list published in the year 2016 with effect from as 01.04.2016. It is argued by Mr. Agrawal that seniority of the private respondents can be taken into consideration for the purpose of promotion only and the seniority list should be prepared according to Rule 27 of Chhattisgarh Panchayat Service (Recruitment and General Conditions of Service) Rules 1999. He has placed reliance on the judgment passed by Hon’ble Division Bench of this Court in W.A. No. 475/2015 parties being Smt. Reeta Singh Vs. State of Chhattisgarh & Ors. and connected matters.
3. On the other hand, learned counsel appearing for the respective respondents would oppose.
4. Heard learned counsel for the parties.
5. Having considered the issue involved in this bunch of matters, these writ petitions, at this juncture, are disposed of reserving liberty in favour of the petitioners to make detailed representation(s) before the respondent No. 4 within period of 45 days from today and the said authority shall decide the representation(s) so made by the petitioners in the light of judgment passed by Hon’ble Division Bench in W.A. No. 475/2015 and connected matters preferably within period of further 90 days.
6. With the aforesaid direction(s), these writ petitions are disposed of
