Chattisgarh High Court
Ramesh Kumar Rajput vs State Of Chhattisgarh on 19 March, 2026
Author: Rajani Dubey
Bench: Rajani Dubey
1
2026:CGHC:13091-DB
Digitally signed
by RAVVA UTTEJ
KUMAR RAJU
AFR
HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR
The date when The date when The date when the order
the order is the order is is uploaded on the
reserved pronounced website
Operative Full
19.02.2026 19.03.2026 -- 19.03.2026
WPS No. 4469 of 2019
1 - Ramesh Kumar Rajput S/o Shri Chandrabhan Singh Rajput, aged about
30 years, working as Peon in the office of the High Court Legal Services
Committee, Bilaspur, Bodri, District Bilaspur Chhattisgarh., District : Bilaspur,
(Chhattisgarh).
2 - Shashi Kumar Bhatt S/o Shri Babulal Bhatt, aged about 52 years, working
as Peon in the office of the State Legal Services Authority, Bilaspur, District
Bilaspur (Chhattisgarh).
3 - Dinesh Kumar Thethewar S/o Late Shri Makhan Lal, aged about 52 years,
working as Process Server in the office of the District Legal Services
Authority, Raipur, District Raipur (Chhattisgarh).
4 - Pawan Kumar Nirmalkar S/o Late Shri Bahoran Lal Nirmalkar, aged about
48 years, working as Peon in the office of the High Court Legal Services
Committee, Bilaspur, Bodri, District Bilaspur (Chhattisgarh).
5 - Ravi Kumar Pandey S/o Shri Kedarnath Pandey, aged about 40 years,
2
working as Peon in the office of the High Court Legal Service Committee,
Bilaspur, Bodri, District Bilaspur (Chhattisgarh).
6 - Jitendra Kumar Gond (Sirso) S/o Gautam Singh, aged about 41 years,
working as Process Server in the office of the High Court Legal Service
Committee, Bilaspur, Bodri, District Bilaspur (Chhattisgarh).
... Petitioners
Versus
1 - State of Chhattisgarh Through Secretary, Department of Law & Legislative
Affairs, Mahanadi Bhawan, Atal Nagar, District Raipur (Chhattisgarh).
2 - Member Secretary, Chhattisgarh State Legal Services Authority, Bilaspur,
District Bilaspur (C.G.).
3 - Dilip Kumar Chandrakar Assistant Grade 3, District Legal Aid Authority,
Bilaspur, Distt. Bilaspur, (C.G.).
4 - Kipesh Kumar Dewangan Assistant Grade 3, District Legal Aid Authority,
Dhamtari, Distt. Dhamtari, (C.G.).
5 - Shiv Kumar Surya Assistant Grade 3, Permanent Lok Adalat, Public Utility
Service, Raipur, Distt. Raipur, (C.G.).
6 - Santlal Kerketta Assistant Grade 3, District Legal Aid Authority, Surguja,
Distt. Ambikapur, (C.G.).
7 - Dhamendra Kumar Sinha Assistant Grade 3, District Legal Aid Authority,
Koriya, Distt. Baikunthpur, (C.G.).
8 - Dilharan Sahu Assistant Grade 3, C.G. State Legal Aid Authority, Bilaspur,
Distt. Bilaspur, (C.G.).
9 - Mundi Prasad Joshi Assistant Grade 3, District Legal Aid Authority,
Kondagaon, Distt. Kondagaon, (C.G.).
3
10 - Praveen Kumar Dubey Assistant Grade 3, C.G. State Legal Aid Authority,
Bilaspur, Distt. Bilaspur, (C.G.).
11 - Girish Kumar Sahu Assistant Grade 3, District Legal Aid Authority,
Raigarh, Distt. Raigarh, (C.G.).
12 - Kamalakar Rao Chauhan Assistant Grade 3, C.G. State Legal Aid
Authority, Bilaspur, Distt. Bilaspur, (C.G.).
13 - Shriram Kaushik Assistant Grade 3, C.G. State Legal Aid Authority,
Bilaspur, Distt. Bilaspur, (C.G.).
14 - Firat Ram Yadav Assistant Grade 3, District Legal Aid Authority, Janjgir,
Distt. Janjgir Champa, (C.G.).
15 - Deepesh Kumar Sahu Assistant Grade 3, High Court Legal Aid Authority,
Bilaspur, Distt. Bilaspur, (C.G.).
16 - Anil Kumar Tiwari Assistant Grade 3, High Court Legal Aid Authority,
Bilaspur, Distt. Bilaspur, (C.G.).
17 - Shishir Deshpandey Assistant Grade 3, High Court Legal Aid Authority,
Bilaspur, Distt. Bilaspur, (C.G.).
18 - Chandrashekhar Tiwari Assistant Grade 3, District Legal Aid Authority,
Bilaspur, Distt. Bilaspur, (C.G.).
19 - Puranlal Yadav Assistant Grade 3, High Court Legal Aid Authority,
Bilaspur, Distt. Bilaspur, (C.G.).
20 - Badruram Baghel Assistant Grade 3, District Legal Aid Authority,
Jagdalpur, Distt. Bastar, (C.G.).
21 - Mahendra Kumar Pawar Assistant Grade 3, District Legal Aid Authority,
Bilaspur, Distt. Bilaspur, (C.G.).
4
... Respondents
( Cause title is taken from Case Information System Software.)
For Petitioners : Ms. Reena Singh, Advocate.
For State/Respondent No. 1 : Mr. Avinash Singh, G.A.
For Respondent No. 2 : Mr. Ashish Shrivastava, Senior Advocate
along with Mr. Rahul Ambast, Ms.
Shatabdi Bagchi and Mr. Ishan Singh
Rathore, Advocate.
For Respondents No. 3 to 21: Mr. Pritam Kumar Tiwari, Advocate.
Hon'ble Smt Justice Rajani Dubey, J.
Hon’ble Shri Justice Radhakishan Agrawal, J.
C A V Order
Per, Rajani Dubey, Judge
1. The present petition has been filed by the petitioners under Article
226 of the Constitution of India challenging the advertisement
dated 04.01.2018 issued by respondent No. 2, whereby
applications were invited to fill up 101 posts of Assistant Grade-III;
however, no post was earmarked to be filled by way of promotion
from Class-IV employees as provided under Rule-12 of the
Chhattisgarh State Legal Services Authority Notification.
2. Facts of the case, in brief are that the petitioners were appointed
as Peon and Process Server (class-IV employee) and working in
the office of State Legal Services Authority/District Legal Services
Authority since 2001, 2002 and 2011. On 04.01.2018, respondent
No. 02, Member Secretary issued an advertisement thereby
inviting applications for filling up total number of 101 posts of
Assistant Grade-III. The petitioners have challenged the said
5
advertisement on the ground that as per Rule 6 of Chhattisgarh
State Legal Services Authority Officers and Employees
(Recruitment) Rules, 2012, the recruitment to the post of Assistant
Grade-III is to be made as specified in Schedule-II. Schedule-II
stipulates that 85% post of Assistant Grade-III is to be filled up by
direct recruitment through competitive exam or by deputation and
remaining 15% by way of promotion amongst the Class-IV
employees. The qualification prescribed for the post of Assistant
Grade-III is that a candidate must have passed Higher Secondary
Examination from recognized board or 1 st year of graduation from
any recognized university and must have passed 1 year diploma in
data entry/programming at the speed of 5000 key depressions per
hour from government recognized institution. However, for the
candidates who are considered for appointment in Assistant
Grade-III by way of promotion from Class-IV category, the
minimum qualification so prescribed shall not be mandatory.
Earlier, the General Administration Department of State of Madhya
Pradesh vide its notification dated 23.05.1996 reserved 25% in
place of 20% quota for their promotion to the post of Assistant
Grade-III vide Annexure-P/04. The Scheduled Caste and
Scheduled Tribe Development Department in State of
Chhattisgarh, Raipur has also issued notification on 01.06.2013,
thereby reserving 25% quota for Class-IV employees for their
promotion to the post of Assistant Grade-III. However, in the
instant case, the respondent authorities while issuing the
6
impugned advertisement instead of reserving 15% or 25% quota
for Class-IV employees, invited applications for direct recruitment
on the total 101 posts of Assistant Grade-III which is per se illegal,
arbitrary and contrary to Chhattisgarh State Legal Services
Authority Officers and Employees Recruitment Rules 2012.
Hence, this petition filed by the petitioners seeking following
reliefs:-
10.1 Hon’ble Court may kindly be pleased to call entire
records of the case.
10.2 Hon’ble Court may kindly be pleased to set-aside the
advertisement dated 04.01.2018.
10.3 Hon’ble Court may kindly be pleased to direct
respondent authority to convent the Department Promotion
Committee (D.P.C.) for promotion to the post of class-III
(Assistant Grade-III) from class-IV employee. Hon’ble
Court may further direct respondent authority to consider
case of petitioners for promotion to the post of Assistant
Grade-III from class-IV employee.
10.4 The Hon’ble Court may kindly be pleased to direct
respondents to earmarked 25% of total vacancy of class-III
post, for promotion from class-IV employee, in State
Legal/District Legal Service Authority instead of 15%
reservation in promotion from class-IV to class-III
employee and further declare 15% reservation in
promotion from class-IV to class-III employees in State
Legal/District Legal Services Authority as repugnant,
contrary and unconstitutional and ultra vires, the same is
being challenged, ought to be decided, in the interest of
justice.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioners would submit that in this
petition, the petitioners are assailing the advertisement dated
04.01.2018 issued by respondent No. 2 whereby the total 101
posts of Assistant Grade-III/ Process Writer/ Computer Operator/
Data Entry Operator are being filled up through direct recruitment
without reserving any quota for Class-IV employees in
7
contravention of Rule 6 of Chhattisgarh State Legal Services
Authority Officers and Employees (Recruitment) Rules 2012
(hereinafter shall be referred to as “Rules, 2012”). She submits
that in the entire State of Chhattisgarh, while filling up the post of
Assistant Grade-III, 25% of the total number of posts is
earmarked/reserved to be filled up by way of promotion from
amongst Class-IV employees and 75% is filled up by direct
recruitment. However, in State Legal/District Legal Services
Authority, there is only 15% reservation for promotion of Class-IV
employees which itself is contrary to Rule 10(2) of Chhattisgarh
State Legal Services Authority Rules 2002 (in short “Rules, 2002”)
as also contrary to Rule 16 of Rules, 2012. Rule 10 (2) of the
Rules, 2002 states about the conditions of service and the salary
and allowances of officers and other employees of the State
Authority under sub-section (6) of Section 6. Rule 16 of the Rules,
2012 speaks about the conditions of service, as per this Rule if
there is no provision or provisions are insufficient in the Rules,
2002 regarding conditions of service of all the officers and
employees of the State Authority, the rules and orders for the time
in force applicable in the government officers and employees
holding corresponding post in the State Government shall be
applicable. However, Schedule-II (4) of the Rules, 2012 runs
contrary to Rule 10(2) of the Rules, 2002 and to this extent,
Schedule-II (4) is repugnant, contrary, ultra vires and
unconstitutional.
8
4. Learned counsel for the petitioners further argued that as per
Section 6(6) of the Legal Services Authority Act, 1987 (in short,
the Act of 1987), the officers and other employees of the State
Authority shall be entitled to such salary and allowances and shall
be subject to such other conditions of service as may be
prescribed by the State Government in consultation with the Chief
Justice of the High Court. Further, vide notification dated
10.02.2017 under Article 229 clause(2), the Chief Justice of the
High Court of Chhattisgarh Bilaspur, made Rules for regulating
the appointment, conditions of service & conduct which is
applicable to the Chhattisgarh High Court authorities and
employees, would also be applicable to the Chhattisgarh State &
District Legal Aid Authority and employees in the same manner.
Even, as per Rules, 2012, Schedule III, S.No. 8, the eligibility
criteria prescribed for promotion from Class-IV to Class-III is 5
years service on Class-IV post. Though the petitioners herein are
working since 2001 onwards and have also qualified Hindi
Computer Typing in Departmental Promotion Exam 2018, but on
account of 15% quota being fixed for promotion from Class-IV
employees, the petitioners were left out and if the quota had been
25%, they would have been promoted to the post of Assistant
Grade-III. In the other departments of the State 25% quota is fixed
for Class-IV employees for their promotion and 75% is filled up by
way of direct recruitment. However, without assigning any reason,
the petitioners have been deprived of this benefit and the
9
respondents have arbitrarily fixed 15% quota for Class-IV
employees and 85 % posts is being filled up through direct
recruitment. Learned counsel for the petitioners further submits
that even in the parent High Court i.e., High Court of M.P., it has
amended the M.P. State Legal Services Authority Rules, thereby
enhancing the quota of 15% to 25% for Class-IV employees and
this Court on 21.06.2019 passed an interim order, thereby making
it clear that any appointment made during pendency of this writ
petition shall be subject to the outcome of the writ petition. In view
of the aforesaid submissions, the instant petition deserves to be
allowed and the petitioners be granted the relief sought for.
5. Reliance has been placed on this Court’s order dated 29.01.2026
passed in WPS No. 3800 of 2020 in the case of Rukam Singh
Tomar vs. State of Chhattisgarh and Ors.
6. Per contra, Mr. Avinash Singh, learned G.A. for the respondent
No. 1/State strongly oppose the prayer made by the petitioners
and submits that the petitioners have failed to establish this fact
that Rules are in violation of the Constitution and the Schedule-
II(2) of the Rules, 2012 is in violation of the Act, 1987. The
petitioners have failed to establish as to how their rights are
violated by the impugned Schedule of the Rules, 2012. The sole
contention of the petitioners is that they have very limited chances
of promotion and in other departments, the ratio of promotion from
Class-IV post to Class-III post is 25%. It is well settled principle of
law that promotion cannot be claimed as a matter of right but
10
employee has right to be considered for promotion. The “Chances
of Promotion” is not a “condition of service”. It has been held by
the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the matter of Anil Kumar Vitthal
Shete and Ors. vs. State of Maharashtra & Anr reported in
(2006) 12 SCC 148. In the matter of A. Satyanarayana & Ors. v.
S. Purushotham & Ors. reported in (2008) 5 SCC 416, the
Hon’ble Supreme Court held that the power of the State to fix
quota for promotion cannot be said to be violative of the
Constitutional Scheme of equality as contemplated under Articles
14 and 16 of the Constitution of India and this Court in the matter
of Dr. Om Prakash Sharma vs. State of Chhattisgarh & Ors
held in WPS No. 3214 of 2024 vide its order dated 25.11.2025
that this Court cannot compel the State to create or sanction
posts, nor it can mandate amendments to the statutory
recruitment posts to introduce new promotional hierarchies.
7. Mr. Ashish Shrivastava, learned Senior Advocate for respondent
No. 2/SLSA strongly oppose the prayer of the petitioners and
supporting the argument of the respondent No. 1/State submits
that this petition is pending since 2019 and during pendency of the
said petition vide notification dated 27.06.2025, the Schedule
appended to the Rules, 2012 has been amended. This clearly
shows that the instant writ petition as it was in its original form and
content has already become infructuous and in view of issuance
of notification dated 27.06.2025, it gives a fresh cause of action to
the petitioners to prefer a fresh writ petition, if any and the said
11
issue cannot be assailed in the instant writ petition. The challenge
to notification dated 27.06.2025 completely alters and changes
the nature of the dispute pending before this Court. The
petitioners have simply challenged the notification dated
27.06.2025 by amendment without there being any substantive
pleadings as to how and in what manner the said notification can
be said to be bad in law. The notification dated 27.06.2025 is a
delegated legislation whereby the State Government through the
Department of Law and Legislative Affairs issued the impugned
notification exercising the power conferred by Section 28 read
with Section 6, Section 8-A, Section 9 and Section 11-A of Legal
Services Authority Act, 1987 as well as Rule 25 of the
Chhattisgarh State Legal Services Authority, 2002 to incorporate
certain amendments in the Chhattisgarh State Legal Services
Authority Officers and Employees (Recruitment) Rules 2012. The
notification dated 27.06.2025 is a piece of delegated legislation
which can only be challenged on the permissible ground as has
been laid down by the Hon’ble Apex Court. So, this petition is
without any merit and the same is liable to be dismissed.
8. Reliance has been placed on the decision of Hon’ble Supreme
Court in the matter of Dhole Govind Sahebrao and others v.
Union of India and others reported in (2015) 6 SCC 727, In the
matter of State of Maharashtra and Anr. v. Chandrakant Anant
Kulkarni and Ors reported in (1981) 4 SCC 130, this Court’s
12
order dated 21.01.2026 in the matter of Bastil Minj and Ors. vs.
State of C.G. and Ors. passed in WPS No. 6899 of 2024.
9. Mr. Pritam Kumar Tiwari, learned counsel for respondents No. 3 to
21 supported the argument of respondents No. 1 & 2 and submits
that all respondents were promoted as per Schedule and Rules of
Chhattisgarh State Legal Services Authority and during pendency
of this petition, new notification was issued, but the Schedule has
remained same and the petitioners have failed to demonstrate any
legal injury caused to them due to 85% and 15% quota in the
Rules, and, therefore, there is no legally sustainable ground for
assailing vires of the Rules, 2012.
10. Heard counsel for the respective parties and perused the material
available on record.
11. It is an admitted position in this case that the petitioners are
working as Class-IV employees at Chhattisgarh State Legal
Services Authority and High Court Legal Services Authority. It is
also not disputed that petitioners No. 1 & 2 were posted since
2011 and petitioner No. 3 is posted since 2001 and petitioners No.
4 to 6 are posted since 2002 as Class-IV employees. The
petitioners have filed this petition challenging Annexure-P/01
advertisement dated 04.01.2018 by which various posts were
sought to be filled up by the State Legal Services Authority,
Bilaspur and also challenged the reservation quota of direct
recruitment (85%) and for Class-IV employee (15%).
13
12. In exercise of the powers conferred by Section 28 read with sub-
section (5) and (6) of Section 6, sub-section (5) and (6) of Section
8A, sub-section (5) and (6) of section 9, sub-section (3) and (4) of
Section 11A of the Legal Services Authorities Act, 1987 and rule
25 of Chhattisgarh State Legal Services Authority Rules, 2002,
the State Government in consultation with the Chief Justice of
High Court of Chhattisgarh made rules relating to recruitment and
conditions of service of officers and employees of the
Chhattisgarh State Legal Services Authority i.e., Chhattisgarh
State Legal Services Authority Officers and Employees
(Recruitment) Rules, 2012. Schedule-II (4) of the Rules, 2012
provides as under:-
Schedule-II
S.No. Name of the Post Method of Recruitment Qualification/Eligibility
(1) (2) (3) (4)
4. Assistant Grade III (1) 85% By direct recruitment 1) Must have passed
(LDC)/Computer through competitive examination, Higher Secondary
Operator/Process Writer. as may be prescribed by the Examination (10+2) from
appointing authority or by recognized Board or 1st
deputation of qualified personnel Year of graduation from
from other departments. any recognized
(2) By Promotion from amongst university.
Class IV employees to the extent
of minimum 15% (Not to be (2)Must have passed 1
carried forward) subject to year diploma certificate
suitability. in data
entry/programming at the
(3) By absorption/transfer of the speed of 5000 key
services of employees of similar depressions per hour
or equivalent higher pay scale from government
working in any recognized institution.
department/organization of the (For candidates who are
Government. considered for
appointment in assistant
grade -III (LDC) /process
14
writer by way of
promotion from the class
IV category the minimum
qualification so
prescribed shall not be
mandatory.)
13. Earlier, the provisions of the Chhattisgarh State Legal Services
Authority Rules, 2002 were applicable, and Rule 10 provides as
follows:-
10. the conditions of services and the salary ad
allowances of officers and other employees of the
State Authority under sub-section (6) of Section 6.
(1) The officers and other employees of the
indicated against each in Schedule-A to these
rules.
(2) In all matters like age of retirement, Pensions,
Pay and allowances, benefits and entitlement
the officers and the other employees of the
State Authority shall be governed by the
Services Rules as are applicable to persons
holding equivalent post in the Chhattisgarh
High Court/State Government, appoint
14. During the pendency of this petition, new notification was issued
on 27.06.2025 in which Schedule-II (4) has again remained the
same which is reproduced for ready reference as thus:-
S.No. Name of the Post Method of Recruitment Prescribed educational
qualification/Eligibility
(1) (2) (3) (4)
4. Assistant Grade III (1) 85% By direct recruitment (1) For direct
(LDC)/Computer through competitive recruitment-
Operator/Process Writer. examination, as may be a) Passed (10+2)
prescribed by the appointing Examination from
authority or by deputation of recognized Board, Or
qualified personnel from other Passed Old Higher
departments. Secondary Examination
15
(2) By Promotion from amongst with year examination of
Class IV employees to the graduation course from
extent of minimum 15% (Not to any recognized
be carried forward) subject to University.
suitability.
(3) By absorption/transfer of (b) One year
the services of employees of Diploma/Certificate in
similar or equivalent higher pay Data Entry Operator/
scale working in any Programming from any
department/organization of the recognized Institution.
Government.
(c) Certificate of Hindi
English typing 5000
(Key) Depression per
hour (through Computer
and Software) from
recognized
Board/Institute
Chhattisgarh or
Stenography Typing
Council (efficiency test
for speed shall be
taken).
(2) For Promotion-
Must have working
knowledge on computer-
(For candidates, who are
considered for
appointment Assistant
Grade-III (LDC)/ Process
Writer by way of
promotion from the
Class-IV category the
minimum qualification
so prescribed shall not
be mandatory).
16
15. As per Chhattisgarh High Court Services (Appointment,
Conditions of Service and Conduct) Rules, 2017, the First
Schedule, Class-III S.No. 11, provides as under:-
First Schedule
Class-III
S.No. Name of the post Existing Sanctioned Source & Method Minimum Qualification Scale of Pay/Level
Strength of Appointment & experience in Pay Matrix
11. Junior Judicial 313 1. 70% posts 1. For direct (19500-62000)
Assistant shall be filled up recruitment a 10%
by direct promotion (through
recruitment limited competitive
competitive examination):-
through (a) Must be a graduate
examination. from a recognized
2. 20% posts University and;
shall be filled up (b) One year diploma
by promotion Course computer from
from amongst the I.T.I. or an equivalent
qualified Class-IV recognized
employees Board/University.
subject to 2. For 20% Promotion
suitability and (subject to
strictly on the suitability)-
basis of seniority- (a) Must be a graduate
cum-fitness. The from any recognized
promotion shall University and;
be made in the (b) Must have working
ratio of 1:3 vis-a- knowledge on
vis Staff Car computer."
Drivers and other
Class-IV
employees.
3. 10% posts
shall be filled-up
by promotion
through limited
competitive
examination
strictly on the
basis of merit
amongst the
Class-IV
employees
17
(including
Contingency Paid
Employees)
having minimum
255 years service
in Class-IV posts
(including
Contingency Paid
Employees)25
from the date of
appointment.
16. It is not disputed by respondents No. 1 & 2 that in other State
Departments, promotion quota is 75 % and 25%. The petitioners
have also filed the notification of parent State Madhya Pradesh
dated 23.05.1996 Annexure-A/04 which provides as under:-
मध्यप्रदेश शासन
सामान्य प्रशासन विभाग
ज्ञाप क्रमांक सी. 3-10/1/3/96 भोपाल, दिनांक 23 मई, 1996शासन के समस्त विभाग,
इत्यादि,
मध्यप्रदेश।
विषय :- चतुर्थ श्रेणी के कर्मचारियों की निम्न श्रेणी लिपिक के पदों पर नियुक्ति।
सन्दर्भ :- सामान्य प्रशासन विभाग का ज्ञापन क्र. सी. 3-3/89/3/49, दिनांक 19-1-89.
सामान्य प्रशासन विभाग के उपर्युक्त ज्ञापन में आं शिक संशोधन करते हुए राज्य
शासन द्वारा यह निर्गर लिया गया है कि राज्य के सभी कार्यालयों में चतुर्थ श्रेणी कर्मचारियों
के निम्न श्रेणी लिपिक के पदों पर नियुक्ति के लिये 20 प्रतिशत के स्थान पर 25 प्रतिशत
स्थान सुरक्षित रखे जायें। अतः तद्नुसार भरती नियों में संशोधन कर लिया जाये। नियुक्ति
के लिये अन्य शर्तें पूर्व वत् रहेंगी।
17. Annexure-P/05 is notification dated 01.06.2013 issued by
Aadimjaati tatha Anusuchit Jaati Vikas Vibhag Mantralay Service
Rules, 2013 and as per this Rule, Schedule-II(4) provides as
under:-
18
अनुसूची-दो
स.क्र सेवा /पद का नाम पदों की कुल संख्या भरे जाने वाले कर्तव्य पदों की संख्या का
प्रतिशत टिप्पणियोंसीधी पदोन्नति अन्य सेवा से
भर्ती//चयन द्वारा रथानान्तरण
द्वारा द्वारा(1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7)
(4) सहायक ग्रेड-3 566 75 प्रतिशत 25 प्रतिशत
18. The Hon’ble Apex Court in the matter of Food Corporation of
India and Ors. vs. Parashotam Das Bansal and Ors. reported
in (2008) 5 SCC 100 held in paras No. 9, 10, 11 and 12 as under:-
“9. The appellant is “State” within the meaning of Article 12 of
the Constitution of India. An employee of a State although has
no fundamental right of promotion, it has a right to be
considered therefor. What is necessary is to provide an
opportunity of advancement; promotion being a normal
incidence of service.
10. This Court in O.Z. Hussain (Dr.) v. Union of India¹ opined:
(SCC pp. 691-92, para 7)
“7. This Court, has on more than one occasion,
pointed out that provision for promotion increases
efficiency of the public service while stagnation
reduces efficiency and makes the service ineffective.
Promotion is thus normal incidence of service. There
too is no justification why while similarly placed
officers in other ministries would have the benefit of
promotion, the non-medical ‘A’ Group scientists in the
19
establishment of Director General of Health Services
would be deprived of such advantage. In a welfare
State, it is necessary that there should be an efficient
public service and, therefore, it should have been the
obligation of the Ministry of Health to attend to the
representations of the Council and its members and
provide promotional avenue for this category of
officers. It is, therefore, necessary that on the model
of rules framed by the Ministry of Science and
Technology with such alterations as may be
necessary, appropriate rules should be framed within
four months from now providing promotional avenue
for the ‘A’ category a scientists in the non-medical
wing of the Directorate.”
11. The question also came up for consideration in Ujagar Prints
(III) v. Union of India and Council of Scientific and Industrial
Research v. K.G.S. Bhatt, In the latter decision, this Court held:
(SCC pp. 638-39, para 9)
“9…. It is often said and indeed, adroitly, an
organisation public or b private does not ‘hire a hand’
but engages or employs a whole man. The person is
recruited by an organisation not just for a job, but for
a whole career. One must, therefore, be given an
opportunity to advance. This is the oldest and most
important feature of the free enterprise system. The
20opportunity for advancement is a requirement for
progress of any organisation. It is an incentive for
personnel development as well. (See c Principles of
Personnel Management by Flipo Edwin B., 4th Edn.,
p. 246.) Every management must provide realistic
opportunities for promising employees to move
upward. “The organisation that fails to develop a
satisfactory procedure for promotion is bound to pay
a severe penalty in terms of administrative costs,
misallocation of personnel, low morale, and
ineffectual performance, among both non-managerial
d employees and their supervisors.’ (See Personnel
Management by Dr. Udai Pareek, p. 277.) There
cannot be any modern management much less any
career planning, manpower development,
management development, etc. which is not related
to a system of promotions.’
12. When employees are denied an opportunity of promotion
for long years (in this case 30 years) on the ground that they
fell within a category of employees excluded from
promotional prospect, the superior court will have the
jurisdiction to issue necessary direction.”
19. This Court in a similar matter in WPS No. 2760 of 2015 in the
case of Shrikant Pandey and Ors. vs. State of Chhattisgarh
21
and Ors. where the petitioners, were working as peon in the office
of Advocate General held in paras No. 11, 12, 13 & 14 as under:-
“11. Thus for all practical purposes, the periodical
order dated 15/11/1984 which stood modified on
19/01/1989 and later got further modified vide order
dated 23/05/1996 remains in force in the State of
Chhattisgarh as well.
12. The documents which have been produced before
this court in respect of Education Department, Women
and Child Department, General Administration
Department, Revenue Department, Commercial Tax
Department so also Tribal Welfare Department have
adopted the said orders. They have been taking into
consideration the said circulars of the State
Government and have kept reservation for class-IV
category employees for promotion to class-III cadre at
25%. This court thus sees no reason as to why there
should be an exception to the Law and Legislative
Department.
13. Thus, once when by virtue of the order dated
31/10/2002, the State of Chhattisgarh having held that
all the circulars, memos and directions issued by the
undivided State of Madhya Pradesh would be
applicable in the State of Chhattisgarh as well, the
petitioners also in the instant case would be entitled for
22the same treatment wherein they should also be
considered for the post of Assistant Grade-III wherein
the percentage of posts available to them should be
taken as 25% as and when the next vacancy arises.
14. Accordingly, the present Writ Petition stands
allowed and disposed off with a direction to the
respondent No. 1 that, as and when the next
recruitment to the post of Assistant Grade-III would be
conducted in the Law and Legislative Department, the
case of the petitioners would also be considered
keeping the total number of post available to them at
25% in accordance to the circular dated 23/05/1996.”
20. Section 6(6) of the Legal Services Authority Act, 1987 provides as
under:-
Section 6. Constitution of State Legal Services
Authority.
(6) The officers and other employees of the State
Authority shall be entitled to such salary and
allowances and shall be subject to such other
conditions of service as may be prescribed by the
State Government in consultation with the Chief
Justice of the High Court.
21. The Rules, 2012 prescribe 15% quota for Class-IV employees for
promotion to the post of Assistant Grade-III and 85% for direct
recruitment. In the year 2025 a Gazette notification was issued
where the said quota remains unchanged. It is also not disputed
that in other government departments, the promotion quota is
25% and direct recruitment quota is 75%. The petitioners have
23
also filed notification dated 15.07.2021 by which Government of
Madhya Pradesh amended the Rules related to Madhya Pradesh
State Legal Services Authority Recruitment and Services Rules
2009 which is reproduced hereinunder for ready reference as
thus:-
Notification
In the said rules, in rule 7(1)(2), for figure and words “Minimum
15% (Fifteen) figure and words “Minimum 25% (Twenty Five)
Shall be substituted.
22. Thus, it is evident that, except for the petitioners’ department
(SLSA), all other State Departments, including the State Legal
Services Authority of the parent High Court, have revised their
service conditions and fixed the promotion quota at 25%.
However, the Chhattisgarh State Legal Services Authority has not
amended the Schedule, and the quota still remains at 85% for
direct recruitment and 15% for promotion.
23. It is also not disputed that the petitioners are working since 2002
and 2011 and due to this Schedule, they are not benefited like
employees of other Government Department. From the very
beginning Legal Services Authority Act, 1987 clearly held in
Section 6(6) that Officers and other employees of the State
Authority shall be entitled to such salary and allowances and shall
be subject to such other conditions of service as may be
prescribed by the State Government in consultation with the Chief
Justice of the High Court and in notification dated 10.02.2017, it is
24
provided that appointment, conditions of service and conduct
Rules, 2017 which is applicable to Chhattisgarh High Court
authorities and employees would also be applicable to the
Chhattisgarh State and District Legal Services Authority and
employees in the same manner, but it is clear from Schedule-II
that there is difference in service quota. The petitioners filed this
petition in 2019 and this Court passed an interim order on
21.06.2019 which reads as thus:-
“Purely as an interim measure, it is ordered that any
appointment made during the pendency of the writ petition
shall be subject to the outcome of the writ petition.”
24. Keeping in view the service conditions of the employees of
various departments of the State Government, the employees of
this High Court and the employees of the Legal Services Authority
of the parent High Court i.e., High Court of M.P., this Court is of
the opinion that the services of the petitioners herein also deserve
to be governed by such conditions and no different yardstick can
be applied to the detriment of their interest.
25. On the basis of aforesaid discussion, respondents No. 1 & 2 are
directed to amend Schedule-II(4) of Chhattisgarh State Legal
Services Authority Officers and Employees (Recruitment) Rules,
2012, thereby enhancing the quota of 15% reserved for class-IV
employees to 25%. After such amendment if the petitioners are
found suitable, then respondent No. 02 to grant them promotion
with all consequential benefits including seniority except the
25
monetary benefits from the date of filing of this petition. The entire
exercise must be completed within a period of 03 months from the
date of this order.
26. As an upshot, the writ petition stands allowed to the above extent
only.
Sd/- Sd/-
(Rajani Dubey) (Radhakishan Agrawal)
Judge Judge
U.K. Raju
