Allowed¶42

Irfan Ali v. State of Chhattisgarh

Chhattisgarh HC24 Apr 2026WPS/722/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

High Court of Chhattisgarh, Bilaspur; WPS No. 722 of 2022; decided 25/04/2026 by Justice Rakesh Mohan Pandey. Review DPC ordered after petitioner (Hostel Manager) was omitted from DPC of 12.11.2021 for promotion to Registrar (College) owing to non-availability of his ACR for 2020; departmental negligence in not placing ACRs before DPC; consequential benefits granted from 31.12.2021; juniors promoted on 31.12.2021; petition allowed, no cost; State of Chhattisgarh, Department of Higher Education, Commissioner Higher Education.

What did the court decide?

Convening of a review DPC with reference to the DPC dated 12.11.2021 and consideration of the petitioner's name for promotion to the post of Registrar (College), together with grant of all consequential benefits with effect from 31.12.2021; no order as to cost. ¶42

Irfan Ali Vs State of Chhattisgarh — Chhattisgarh HC (2026) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶42

Issue for consideration

Whether the petitioner, who was eligible for promotion to the post of Registrar (College) but whose name was left out of the DPC convened on 12.11.2021 for want of his ACR for 2020, should be considered for promotion through a review DPC. +1 more

¶33

Court's answer

Respondent No. 3 was under obligation to place the required ACRs of the petitioner before the DPC.

¶37

Ratio / Principle

Since there was negligence on the part of the department itself in not making the petitioner's ACR available, the petitioner cannot be made to suffer.

¶39

Key takeaways

The respondent authorities are directed to convene a review DPC with reference to the DPC dated 12.11.2021 and to consider the petitioner's name for promotion to the post of Registrar (College).ratio¶40
The petitioner shall be granted all consequential benefits with effect from 31.12.2021.ratio¶41

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Promotion — omission of eligible officer from DPC for want of ACR: The petitioner, working as Hostel Manager and eligible for promotion to the post of Registrar (College), was not considered by the DPC convened on 12.11.2021 because his ACR for the year 2020 was not available to it, while juniors to him were promoted vide order dated 31.12.2021. Holding that Respondent No. 3 was under obligation to place the required ACRs before the DPC and that, the negligence lying with the department itself, the petitioner could not be made to suffer, the Court directed the respondent authorities to convene a review DPC with reference to the DPC dated 12.11.2021, consider the petitioner's name for promotion to Registrar (College), and grant him all consequential benefits with effect from 31.12.2021. Petition allowed; no order as to cost.

¶1

¶2

Digitally signed by NADIM MOHLE

¶3

2026:CGHC:19165

¶4

NAFR

¶5

HIGH COURT of CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR

¶6

WPS No. 722 of 2022

¶7

Irfan Ali S/o Late Sayyid Ahsan Ali Aged About 62 Years R/o Near Post office, Rajendra Nagar, Bilaspur Chhattisgarh., District : Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh

¶8

... Petitioner

¶9

versus

¶10

1 - State of Chhattisgarh Through The Secretary, Department of Higher Education, Mantralaya, Mahanadi Bhawan, Nawa Raipur, District Raipur Chhattisgarh., District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh

¶11

2 - Commissioner Higher Education, Directorate of Higher Education, Indravati Bhawan, Nawa Raipur, District Raipur Chhattisgarh., District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh

¶12

3 - Principal, Government Agrasen College, Belha, District Bilaspur Chhattisgarh., District : Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh

¶13

4 - Shrimati Namita Kar, Hostel Superintendent, B.M.S. Government Pg College, Dhamtari, District Dhamtari Chhattisgarh., District : Dhamtari, Chhattisgarh

¶14

5 - Y.K. Deepak, Hostel Superintendent, Government Kirori Mal Pg College, Raigarh, District - Raigarh Chhattisgarh., District : Raigarh, Chhattisgarh

¶15

6 - Sanjiv Kumar Shrivastava, Government J.P. Verma Pg Arts And Commerce College, Bilaspur, District - Bilaspur Chhattisgarh., District : Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh

¶16

7 - Sanjay Kumar Joshi, Government Bilasa Girls Pg College, Bilaspur, District Bilaspur Chhattisgarh., District : Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh

¶17

8 - Vishnu Chandrakar, Government Dudhadhari Bajrang Pg Girls College, Raipur, District Raipur Cg, District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh

¶18

¶19

9 - Rajesh Komalwar, Government Dau Kalyan Singh Pg College, Balodabazar, District Balodabazar Chhattisgarh., District : Balodabazar-Bhathapara, Chhattisgarh

¶20

10 - Bhagatram Bhardwaj, Government N.E.S. Pg College, Jashpur Nagar, District Jashpur Chhattisgarh., District : Jashpur, Chhattisgarh

¶21

11 - J.P. Lashkar, Government Rajiv Gandhi Pg College, Ambikapur, District Ambikapur Chhattisgarh., District : Surguja (Ambikapur), Chhattisgarh

¶22

... Respondent(s)

¶23

For Petitioner	: Ms. Chetna Sharma, Advocate on behalf of Mr.
	Rajnish Singh Baghel, Advocate
For State	: Mr. Vivek Siddharth Ojha, Panel Lawyer

¶24

Hon’ble Shri Justice Rakesh Mohan Pandey

¶25

Order on Board

¶26

25/04/2026

¶27

The petitioner has filed this petition seeking the following relief:–

¶28

“10.i. To call for the records of related with issuance of impugned order (P-1) from the respondent no. 1 and 2, and

¶29

ii. Direct the respondent no.1 to 3 to promote the petitioner w.e.f. 01/05/2015 i.e. the day after petitioner completed 8 years of service of feeder post, by issuance of writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ or orders or directions, And/Or

¶30

iii. Direct the respondent no. 1 to 3 to promote the petitioner w.e.f. 31/12/2021 over and above the respondent no.4 to 11 and for that if necessary quash the promotions of respondent no. 4 to 11, by issuance of writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ or orders And/Or

¶31

¶32

iv. Grant any other order as the honourable court may deem fit in facts and circumstances of the case. ”

¶33

Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner, who is presently working on the post of Hostel Manager, was eligible for promotion to the post of Registrar (College). However, in the DPC convened on 12.11.2021, his name was not considered in absence of ACR for the year 2020. She would further submit that a direction may be issued to the respondent authorities to conduct a review DPC for promotion to the post of Registrar (College), and the petitioner may be granted promotion w.e.f. 31.12.2021 with all consequential benefits attached to the post.

¶34

On the other hand, learned State counsel appearing for the State would oppose the submissions made by counsel for the petitioner and submit that the ACR of the petitioner pertaining to the year 2020 was not available with the DPC; therefore, the petitioner’s name was not considered for promotion; thus, the petition deserves to be dismissed.

¶35

Heard.

¶36

In paragraph 4 of the return filed by the State, it is categorically stated that the ACR of the petitioner for the year 2020 was not available; therefore, his name was not considered for promotion to the next higher post, i.e., Registrar (College).

¶37

It is not in dispute that juniors to the petitioner were promoted to the post of Registrar (College) vide order dated 31.12.2021. Respondent No. 3 was under obligation to place the required ACRs of the petitioners before the DPC. As there was negligence

¶38

¶39

on the part of the department itself, the petitioner cannot be made to suffer.

¶40

Accordingly, the respondent authorities are directed to convene a review DPC with reference to the DPC dated 12.11.2021 and consider the name of the petitioner for promotion to the post of Registrar (College).

¶41