Chhattisgarh High Court
Employment and Labour LawAdministrative and Public Law

Authorities directed to decide the petitioner’s fresh seniority representation in accordance with law.

UTTRA KUMAR KOSARIYA vs STATE OF CHHATTISGARH

Chhattisgarh High CourtJUDGMENT: September 15, 20262 MIN READSOURCE JUDGMENT
Authorities directed to decide the petitioner’s fresh seniority representation in accordance with law.. UTTRA KUMAR KOSARIYA vs STATE OF CHHATTISGARH. Chhattisgarh High Court. LawLens
THE ORIGINAL LAWLENS SUMMARY
01

Facts

The petitioner, a teacher posted at Government Middle School, Bhusrenga, District Dhamtari, filed a writ petition seeking re-fixation of his seniority from his initial date of joining, placement at the appropriate position in the gradation list, and consequential benefits including consideration for promotion and pay fixation.

Source reference: para. 1

During the hearing, the petitioner’s counsel requested permission to submit a fresh representation before the competent authorities and sought a direction for its consideration and disposal in accordance with law.

Source reference: para. 2

The State counsel raised no objection to the limited relief sought.

Source reference: para. 3
02

Issues

Whether the petitioner should be permitted to submit a fresh representation regarding re-fixation of his seniority and consequential service benefits.

Source reference: paras. 1–2

Whether the respondent authorities should be directed to consider and decide the petitioner’s representation in accordance with law, without the High Court adjudicating the merits at that stage.

Source reference: paras. 2–4
03

Law Applied

The Court applied the procedural principle that, where a petitioner elects to pursue an administrative remedy by submitting a representation to the competent authority, the writ petition may be disposed of by granting liberty to make such representation and directing the authority to consider and decide it in accordance with law.

Source reference: no citation

The Court expressly refrained from making any observation on the merits of the petitioner’s claim.

Source reference: para. 4

No specific statutory provision or judicial precedent was cited or relied upon in the order.

Source reference: no citation
04

Reasoning

The petitioner’s substantive grievance concerned correction of his seniority and consequential service benefits, but, after hearing the matter, he limited his request to pursuing a fresh representation before the respondent authorities.

Source reference: paras. 1–2

Since the State had no objection, the Court considered it appropriate not to examine the merits of the seniority claim in the writ proceedings at that stage.

Source reference: paras. 3–4

It therefore granted liberty to the petitioner to approach the competent authorities and directed them to consider and decide the representation in accordance with law.

Source reference: paras. 3–4
05

Holding

The writ petition was disposed of without adjudicating the merits of the petitioner’s claim.

The petitioner was granted liberty to submit a fresh representation to the respondent authorities concerning his seniority and related benefits, and the authorities were directed to consider and decide the same in accordance with law.

Source reference: paras. 4–5
Chhattisgarh High Court

Original Court PDF

UTTRA KUMAR KOSARIYAvsSTATE OF CHHATTISGARH

Chhattisgarh High Court · September 15, 2026

Click to open original judgment

Original judgment, available to read, download and summarize on LawLens.in

Click to open original judgment