Dismissed

Mahendra Singh Markam v. State Of Chhattisgarh

Chhattisgarh HC15 Aug 2024WPS/2705/2015

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Two clerks challenged their disqualification for promotion to Principal due to third division post-graduate degrees despite requisite experience. The High Court, examining the promotion rules, held that the mandatory second division in post-graduation was not met and dismissed the writ petitions. No case is made out for interference.

What did the court decide?

The writ petitions were dismissed as no case is made out for interference.

Mahendra Singh Markam Vs State Of… — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Chhattisgarh HC (2024)

¶1

Digitally signed by REKHA SINGH

¶2

NAFR

¶3

2024:CGHC:31047

¶4

HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR

¶5

WPS No. 2705 of 2015

¶6

Mahendra Singh Markam S/o Late Shri Sup Singh Markam Aged About 51 Years Presently Posted As Lecturer At B.N.B. Government Higher Secondary School Neora- Tilda Block - Tilda Tahsil Tilda P.S. Tilda District Raipur Chhattisgarh, Chhattisgarh

¶7

---- Petitioner

¶8

versus

¶9

1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Secretary School Education Department, Mahanadi Bhawan Mantralaya, P.S. Rakhi, Naya Raipur, District Raipur Chhattisgarh, Chhattisgarh

¶10

2 - The Deputy Secretary School Education Department, Chhattisgarh Government, Mahanadi Bhawan Mantralaya, P.S. Rakhi, Naya Raipur, District Raipur Chhattisgarh

¶11

3 - Director Public Education Directorate, Directorate, Block- 3, First Flore Indirawati Bhawan, Naya Raipur, District Raipur Chhattisgarh

¶12

4 - District Education Officer, Pensan Bada Near Shailendra Nagar Raipur, District Raipur Chhattisgarh ---- Respondents

¶13

and

¶14

WPS No. 2791 of 2015

¶15

Arvind Kerketta S/o Shri S. Kerketta Aged About 46 Years Presently Posted As Lecturer, At Bharat Dewangan Government Higher Secondary School Kharora, Block Tilda, Tahsil Tilda, P.S. Kharora, District Raipur, Chhattisgarh, Chhattisgarh ---- Petitioner

¶16

Versus

¶17

-2-

¶18

1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Secretary, School Education Department, Mahanadi Bhawan Mantralaya, P.S. Rakhi, Naya Raipur, District Raipur, Chhattisgarh, Chhattisgarh

¶19

2 - The Deputy Secretary School Education Department, Chhattisgarh Government, Mahanadi Bhawan, Mantralaya, P.S. Rakhi, Naya Raipur, District Raipur, Chhattisgarh

¶20

3 - Director, Public Education Directorate, Directorate, Block-3, First Flore Indireawati Bhawan, Naya Raipur, District Raipur, Chhattisgarh

¶21

4 - District Education Officer, Pensan Bada Near Shailendra Nagar Raipur, District Raipur, Chhattisgarh ---- Respondents

¶22

For Petitioners : None appears even in the second round. For State : Ms. Nupoor Sonkar, Panel Lawyer

¶23

Hon'ble Shri Justice Rakesh Mohan Pandey Order on Board

¶24

16.08.2024

¶25

In both petitions, the petitioners were appointed to the post of Lecturer in the School Education Department on the pay scale of Rs.5500-175-9000. They completed their B.Ed. training and in the month of March and April, 2013, they completed their PostGraduation. The petitioners were granted a higher pay scale vide order dated 26.06.2013. An application was moved by the petitioners before the Director, Public Education Directorate, Chhattisgarh, Raipur to add their Post-Graduation qualification into their Service Book. The provisional gradation list was published on 22.12.2014 with effect from 01.04.2013 and the name of the petitioner in WPS No. 2705 of 2015 appears at serial No. 513 and the name of the petitioner in WPS No. 2791 of 2015 appears at serial No. 471. On 05.05.2015, again a gradation list was published but the additional qualification of the petitioners was not

¶26

added. A DPC was held for the post of Principal, High School/Higher Secondary School on 22.01.2014 and the order of promotion was issued on 18.06.2015 but the names of the petitioners were not considered and therefore, representations were made and both these petitions were filed.

¶27

There is no representation on behalf of the petitioners in both cases even in the second round.

¶28

From a perusal of the documents including the promotion rules i.e. the Chhattisgarh School Education Gazetted Service (School Level Service) Recruitment and Promotion Rules, 2008 and Schedule-III appended to these Rules, it is apparent that the minimum educational qualification for promotion to the post of Principal, High/Higher Secondary School is (i) 2nd Division PostGraduate Degree; (ii) B.Ed./B.El.Ed., and (iii) 5 years teaching Experience of Government/Panchayat Higher Secondary School. The petitioners were appointed to the post of Lecturer in the year 1999 and therefore, at the time when the DPC was convened, they had the requisite teaching experience of 5 years. Admittedly, both the petitioners had qualifications of B.Ed. Now coming to the third requirement i.e. Second Division Post-Graduate Degree, from a perusal of the mark sheet, it appears that the petitioner/Mahendra Singh Markam passed M.A. Final (Economics) with Third Division likewise, the petitioner/Arvind Kerketta passed M.A. Final (Political Science) with Third Division in the year 2013 from Pt. Ravishankar Shukla University, Raipur (C.G.). Though the representations were preferred before the appropriate authority to add the additional

¶29

-4-

¶30

qualification in the Service Book and the same was considered by the authority, since the petitioners did not have the required qualification i.e. Second Division Post-Graduate Degree, their claims were not considered for promotion to the post of Principal.

¶31

Taking into consideration the above-stated facts and the material available on the record, in the opinion of this Court, no case is made out for interference. Both the petitions fail and are hereby

¶32

dismissed . No cost(s).

¶33

Sd/-

¶34

(Rakesh Mohan Pandey) Judge

¶35

Rekha

Mahendra Singh Markam v. State Of Chhattisgarh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mahendra Singh Markam v. State Of Chhattisgarh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Basant Pandey Vs Coal India Limited and Ors.

Santlal Sahu Vs State Of Chhattisgarh And Anr.

Dindayal Vs South Eastern Coalfields Limited And Ors.

Arvind Kerketta Vs State Of Chhattisgarh

Sel Singh Netam Vs State Of Chhattisgarh

Rajendra Prasad Bhaiya Vs State Of Chhattisgarh