Chhattisgarh High Court
WPS/4380/2020 of MRS. MADHUMITA SAHU, Vs THE STATE OF CHHATTISGARH, on 31 August 2026
2026:CGHC:38645
of 2020) CGHC010229892020 2026:CGHC:38645 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPS No. 4380 of 2020 1 - Mrs. Madhumita Sahu, W/o Mr. Shiv Ram Sahu, Aged About 38 Years By Occupation Lecturer (Local Body) Posted At Government High School Thekwadih, Block Gurur, District Balod Chhattisgarh
CGHC010229892020
2026:CGHC:38645
NAFR
HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR
WPS No. 4380 of 2020
1 - Mrs. Madhumita Sahu, W/o Mr. Shiv Ram Sahu, Aged About 38 Years By Occupation Lecturer (Local Body) Posted At Government High School Thekwadih, Block Gurur, District Balod Chhattisgarh
--- Petitioner(s)
versus
1 - The State Of Chhattisgarh, Through Secretary, School Education Department Mantralaya, Mahanadi Bhawan Naya Raipur, District Raipur Chhattisgarh 2 - Secretary, Panchayat And Rural Development Department, Mantralaya, Mahanadi Bhawan Naya Raipur, District Raipur Chhattisgarh 3 - Director, Panchayat And Rural Development Department, Sanchanalya, Naya Raipur, District Raipur Chhattisgarh 4 - District Education Officer, District Balod Chhattisgarh 5 - Chief Executive Officer, Jila Panchayat, District Balod Chhattisgarh
--- Respondent(s)
(Cause-title taken from the Case Information System)
For Petitioner
:- Mr. Parag Kotecha, Advocate
For Respondent-State
:- Mr. Pranjal Shukla, Panel Lawyer
Page 1 of 2
SB - Hon'ble Shri Justice Sanjay K. Agrawal Order On Board 01.09.2026
1. Heard.
2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the respondent department has counted the previous service of the petitioner for the purpose of revised pay scale but not counting the same for the purpose of absorption in the department, for which the petitioner may be allowed to make representation before the respondent/competent authority.
3. Learned State Counsel would submit that if the petitioner makes representation with regard to counting her previous service for the purpose of absorption, it would be considered and decided within a period of six weeks.
4. Be that as it may, the petitioner is allowed to file a representation along with copy of this order and other relevant documents before the respondent department/competent authority for redressal of her grievance within three weeks from today, and, in turn, the respondent department/competent authority is directed to consider and decide the said representation of the petitioner on its own merit strictly in accordance with law by passing a reasoned and speaking order within six weeks from the date of receipt of the said representation.
5. With the aforesaid direction and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, this writ petition stands finally disposed of.
Sd/- (Sanjay K. Agrawal)
Judge @d!t!
Page 2 of 2
Loading citations and judicial treatment…