RASHMI BHASKAR vs THE STATE OF CHHATTISGARH Advocate - A.G. — WPS/3282/2026

Disposed: Contested--DISPOSED OFF on 16th April 2026.

Case disposed

CNR: CGHC010125042026

Filing Number

WPS/7189/2026

Filing Date

25-Mar-2026

Registration No

WPS/3282/2026

Registration Date

13-Apr-2026

Judge

Hon'ble Shri Justice Parth Prateem Sahu

Coram

Hon'ble Shri Justice Parth Prateem Sahu

Bench Type

Single Bench

Category

SERVICE MATTERS ( 6 )

Sub-Category

PAY SCALES/ INCREMENTS / ALLOWANCES. ( 610 )

Judicial Branch

Writ Section

Decision Date

16-Apr-2026

Nature of Disposal

Contested--DISPOSED OFF

Last updated 26-May-2026

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.RASHMI BHASKAR

    Adv. RAJESH ROSHAN SINGH

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.THE STATE OF CHHATTISGARH Advocate - A.G.

  2. 2.The State of Chhattisgarh

  3. 3.The State of Chhattisgarh

  4. 4.The Director General Of Police head Quarter,

Case History

  1. Case disposedDisposed

  2. 16-Apr-2026

    Hon'ble Shri Justice Parth Prateem SahuView PDF

    The High Court of Chhattisgarh disposed of Rashmi Bhaskar's petition with a direction requiring her to submit a fresh representation before the competent authority claiming benefits extended to similarly placed employees under the December 3, 2013 order. The court directed that if verification confirms she is identically placed, appropriate orders must be passed within two months, while preserving her right to legal recourse if an adverse order is issued. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

  3. 16-Apr-2026

    Fresh Matters

    Hon'ble Shri Justice Parth Prateem Sahu

  4. 25-Mar-2026

    Case filed

    Registration No. WPS/3282/2026

casestatus.in Summary

The High Court of Chhattisgarh disposed of Rashmi Bhaskar's petition with a direction requiring her to submit a fresh representation before the competent authority claiming benefits extended to similarly placed employees under the December 3, 2013 order. The court directed that if verification confirms she is identically placed, appropriate orders must be passed within two months, while preserving her right to legal recourse if an adverse order is issued. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

District Courts Supreme Court
Search Another Case