Sardharam Chauhan Vs State of Chhattisgarh — Chhattisgarh HC (2026) — LawSathi Research

Sardharam Chauhan Vs State of Chhattisgarh — Chhattisgarh HC (2026) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Writ petition disposed of at this stage with liberty to the petitioner to submit a fresh representation before Respondents No. 3 & 4 (District Education Officer and Block Education Officer); the concerned authority to consider and decide the representation in accordance with law, preferably within two months of receipt. No relief granted on the challenge to the order dated 11/01/2024 or the gradation list dated 01/04/2025.

Issue for consideration

Whether the petitioner, stated to be an E-Cadre employee figuring in the E-Cadre gradation list, was erroneously shown in the gradation list of T-Cadre employees. +2 more

Ratio / Principle

Since the petitioner's grievance was already raised by pending representations (Annexure P/5 & P/6), it was in the petitioner's interest to dispose of the writ petition at this stage with a direction to the concerned respondents to take a decision on the representation.

Key takeaways

The writ petition is disposed of at this stage, permitting the petitioner to submit a fresh representation before Respondents No. 3 (District Education Officer) and No. 4 (Block Education Officer).ratio¶31
The concerned authority shall consider and take a decision on such representation in accordance with law expeditiously, preferably within a further period of 02 months from the date of receipt of the representation.ratio¶31

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Writ Petition (WPS No. 666 of 2026, High Court of Chhattisgarh, Bilaspur, Parth Prateem Sahu, J., order dated 21/01/2026): Petitioner, a Peon (Class IV) appointed on 08.12.1995 and shown at Serial No. 19 of the E-Cadre gradation list as on 01.04.2023, challenged the order dated 11/01/2024 (Annexure P/1) of the District Education Officer and the gradation list dated 01/04/2025, alleging that though an E-Cadre employee his name was erroneously included in the T-Cadre gradation list, resulting in promotion of Respondent No. 5 (junior to him) as Assistant Grade-III superseding him. His representations (Annexure P/5 & P/6) were pending. HELD: Without deciding the rival contentions on merits, writ petition disposed of at this stage permitting the petitioner to submit a fresh representation before Respondents No. 3 & 4; the concerned authority to consider and decide it in accordance with law expeditiously, preferably within 02 months of receipt.

1

2026:CGHC:3500

NAFR

HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR

WPS No. 666 of 2026

1 - Sardharam Chauhan S/o Shri Mangal Prasad Chouhan Aged About 51 Years Presently Posted As Peon, Govt. Middle School, Salheona, Block Baramkela, District Sarangarh-Bilaigarh, C.G.

... Petitioner

Versus

1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Secretary School Education Department, Mantralaya, Mahanadi Bhavan, Naya Raipur, District Raipur, C.G.

2 - Collector District Sarangarh-Bilaigarh, C.G.

3 - District Education Officer District Sarangarh-Bilaigarh, C.G.

4 - Block Education Officer Block Baramkela, District Sarangarh-Bilaigarh, C.G.

5 - Tikaram Nirala Assistant Grade Iii Govt. Higher Secondary School, Godam, Block Sarangarh, District Sarangarh-Bilaigarh, C.G.

... Respondents

For Petitioner : Ms. Zainab Mustafa Wanak, Advocate For Respondents/State : Ms. Anuja Sharma, Dy. Government Advocate

SB: Hon'ble Shri Parth Prateem Sahu, Judge

ORDER ON BOARD

21/01/2026

The petitioner has filed this writ petition seeking following reliefs:-

“10.1 That the Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to quash the impugned order dated 11/01/2024 (Annexure P/1) passed by the District Education Officer, District Sarangarh-Bhilaigarh, C.G. till the extent of private respondent.

2

10.2 That the Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to quash the impugned gradation list dated 01/04/2025 upto the extent of the petitioner.

10.3 That the Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to direct the respondent State to grant any other relief which this Hon'ble Court deems fit and proper in favour of the petitioner as per the facts & circumstance of the present case, in the ends of justice.”

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner was initially employed as Peon (Class IV) and posted at Government Middle School, Badeamakoni, Block - Baramkela, District – Raigarh, Chhattisgarh. His appointment was of 08.12.1995 and thereafter, he was transferred to Government Middle School, Saleona, Block – Baramkela. District – Raigarh pursuant to the order dated 20.07.2015 passed by the Respondent No. 2/Collector. The name of petitioner is mentioned at Serial No. 19 in the gradation list formulated as on 01.04.2023 of the employees of E-Cadre and the name of the Respondent No. 5 is mentioned at Serial No. 21.

She submits that the respondent authorities have initiated the proceedings for the promotion of Peon to the post of Assistant Grade – III. However, after issuance of the order of promotion, petitioner came to know that superseding him, junior to the petitioner i.e. Respondent No. 5 has been promoted. Petitioner thereafter has verified the fact upon which, he came to know that his name has been erroneously mentioned in the gradation list of T-Cadre Peons. Aggrieved with which, petitioner has submitted representation before the respondent authorities, however, it has not been considered till date and therefore, this writ petition is filed.

On the other hand, learned counsel for the Respondents/State submits that according to the pleadings made in the writ petition, it is appearing that according to the petitioner, some error has been crept while preparation of the gradation list for which, the petitioner has already

3

submitted a representation and his representation would be considered in accordance with law.

I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the documents enclosed along with the writ petition.

The grievance of the petitioner is that the petitioner is a E-Cadre employee and his name is also mentioned in the E-Cadre gradation list as on 01.04.2021, however, subsequently, the name of petitioner has been mentioned in the gradation list of the T-Cadre employees. According to the counsel for the petitioner, there is some error on the part of the respondent officials. In the aforementioned facts of the case, when the petitioner has already raised his grievance before the respondents by way of filing representation (Annexure P/5 & P/6) which till date is pending consideration, it will be in the interest of the petitioner if the writ petition is disposed of at this stage, with a direction to the concerned respondents to take decision on the representation (Annexure P/5 & P/6) submitted by the petitioner at the earliest.

Considering the nature of grounds raised in this writ petition, it is disposed of at this stage, permitting the petitioner to subit afresh representation before the Respondents No. 3 & 4 and if such a representation is submitted, the concerned authority shall consider and take decision on the representation in accordance with law expeditiously, preferably within a further period of 02 months from the date of receipt of the representation.

With the aforesaid observation and direction, this writ petition stands disposed of .

Digitally
signed by
SHUBHAM SHUBHAMDEY Sd/-
DEY Date:
2026.01.27 (Parth Prateem Sahu)
11:41:34
+0530 Judge
Dey