Bharat Kumar Yadav vs State Of Chhattisgarh
2026 Latest Caselaw 823 Chatt

Chattisgarh High Court

Bharat Kumar Yadav vs State Of Chhattisgarh on 20 March, 2026

Author: Parth Prateem Sahu

Bench: Parth Prateem Sahu

                                                  1/3




                                                                    2026:CGHC:13487
                                                                                      NAFR
PAWAN
KUMAR
JHA
                       HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR
Digitally
signed by
PAWAN
KUMAR JHA
                                          WPS No. 2630 of 2026

            •   Bharat Kumar Yadav S/o Gangaram Yadav Aged About 41 Years Posted As
                Teacher (LB) Government Girls Middle School Narayanpur Block Kunkuri
                District Jashpur (C.G.)
                                                                              --- Petitioner(s)
                                                 versus


            1. State Of Chhattisgarh Through Its Secretary School Education Department
               Mantralaya Mahanadi Bhawan, Atal Nagar Raipur District Raipur (C.G.)
            2. Mission Director Rajeev Gandhi Shiksha Mission District Raipur (C.G.)
            3. Collector-Cum-District Mission Director Rajeev Gandhi Shiksha Mission
               District Jashpur (C.G.)
            4. District Education Officer Jashpur, District Jashpur (C.G.)
            5. Block Education Officer Kunkuri, District Jashpur (C.G.)
            6. Chief Executive Officer Zila Panchayat Jashpur District Jashpur (C.G.)
            7. Bipin Kumar Ambastha Lecturer (Maths) Govt. Higher Secondary School
               Kaliba Block Kunkuri District Jashpur (C.G.) Presently As Block Resource
               Coordinator, Block Kunkuri District Jashpur (C.G.)
                                                                             --- Respondent(s)

For Petitioner : Mr. Mateen Siddiqui, Advocate For Respondents No. 1, 4 & : Ms. Shailja Shukla, Govt. Advocate 5- State For Respondent No. 2 & 3 Ms. Akanksha Jain, Advocate

Hon'ble Shri Parth Prateem Sahu, Judge Order on Board 20/03/2026

1. Petitioner has filed this writ petition seeking following reliefs.

"10.1 That, this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to set-aside/quashed the impugned

order Dated 08.02.2016 (Annexure P/2) issued by the Collector-cum District Mission Director, Rajeev Gandhi Shiksha Mission Jashpur.

10.2 That, this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to set-aside/quashed the order Dated 15.03.2017 (Annexure P/5) issued by the Block Education Officer Kunkuri District Jashpur (C.G.).

10.3 That, the Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to issue writ in the nature of quo warranto against the private respondent and oust the private respondent Bipin Kumar Ambastha from the Block Resource Coordinator (BRC) Block Kunkuri and to kindly direct the respondent State to consider the candidature of the petitioner's posting as Block Resource Coordinator (BRC) Block Kunkuri as the petitioner is fully eligible. 10.4 To kindly make any other order that may be deemed fit and just in the facts and circumstances of the case including awarding of the costs to the petitioner.

2. Learned counsel for petitioner submits that according to the guidelines

issued by the Samagra Siksha Mission, Teachers who are holding the

post of Lecturer in the School Education Department are not to be

posted as Block Resource Coordinator. Respondent No. 7 though

holding the post of Lecturer is again appointed as Block Resource

Coordinator, which is in contravention to the guidelines issued in this

regard. Petitioner has submitted representation before Respondent

No. 3/ Collector-cum-District Mission Director, which is pending

consideration and therefore direction be issued to Respondent No. 3 to

take decision on the representation submitted by petitioner at the

earliest within specified time.

3. Learned counsel for Respondent No. 2 & 3 would submit that as the

petitioner is seeking direction to Respondent No. 3 to take decision on

the decision on the representation, she is having no objection to the

limited prayer. If the representation is still pending consideration, it will

be considered in accordance with law.

4. On due consideration of submission made by learned counsel for the

respective parties, nature of grievance raised, this writ petition at this

stage is disposed of directing Respondent No. 3 to consider and take

decision on representation of petitioner, Annexure P-7 dated

16.10.2025, in accordance with law, expeditiously preferably within a

further period of 02 months from the date of receipt of copy of order

passed by this Court.

5. Petitioner will be at liberty to submit fresh representation, if he so desire

and if such representation is submitted the concerned authority shall

also consider the same in the terms as observed above.

6. With the aforesaid observation and direction, this writ petition is

disposed of.

Sd/-

(Parth Prateem Sahu) Judge pwn