Vikash Kumar Gupta And Others v. State Of Chhattisgarh And ORS.

NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR Writ Petition (S) No.4742 of 2010

1. Vikash Kumar Gupta, S/o Shri Sudama Prasad Gupta, Aged about 27 years, R/o Near Nagar Panchayat Sitapur, Distt. Surguja (C.G.)

2. Avdhesh Das, S/o Shri Sadhucharan Das, Aged about 30 years, R/o Village & P.O. Sur, Sitapur, Distt. Surguja (C.G.)

3. Rajeshwar Kumar Singh, S/o Shri Shiv Shankar Singh, Aged about 27 years, R/o Nagar Panchayat Sitapur, Distt. Surguja (C.G.)

4. Jiyarul Khan, S/o Shri Aminuddin Khan, Aged about 26 years, R/o Village Tokopara, P.O. Raikera, Distt. Surguja (C.G.) ---- Petitioners

Versus

1. State of Chhattisgarh, Through Secretary, Department of Panchayat and Rural Development, D.K.S. Bhawan, Mantralaya, Raipur (C.G.)

2. Collector, Surguja, Distt. Surguja (C.G.)

3. Chief Executive Officer, Zila Panchayat Surguja, Distt. Surguja (C.G.)

4. Chief Executive Officer, Janpad Panchayat Sitapur, Distt. Surguja (C.G.)

5. Head Master, Govt. A.J.K. Primary School, Hardishand, Block Sitapur, Distt. Surguja (C.G.)

6. Head Master, Govt. Primary School, Ratakhand, Block Sitapur, Distt. Surguja (C.G.)

7. Head Master, Govt. Primary School, Pakrikhand, Block Sitapur, Distt. Surguja (C.G.) ---- Respondents ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ For Petitioners:

Mr. Jitendra Shrivastava, Advocate.

For Respondents No.1, 2, 5, 6 and 7 / State: - Mr. Animesh Tiwari, Deputy Advocate General.

For Respondents No.3 and 4: - Mr. Yashwant Singh Thakur, Advocate.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Hon'ble Shri Justice Sanjay K. Agrawal Order On Board 09/08/2021

1. Proceedings of this matter have been taken-up through video

conferencing.

2. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioners would submit that the petitioners worked on the post of Shiksha Karmi Grade-III with respondent No.4 and they are entitled for salary for the period from November, 2009 to April, 2010 for which they had already made representation, and other similarly situated teachers have been paid salary, but the petitioners herein have not been paid salary, therefore, direction be issued for payment of salary.

3. Learned counsel appearing for respondents No.3 & 4 would dispute the above position and submit that they are not entitled for salary.

4. Be that as it may, since the petitioners had already made representation for grant of salary, they are allowed to make further representation within 3 weeks from today and the same shall be considered and decided on merits by respondent No.4 within four weeks from the date of receipt of representation by a reasoned and speaking order.

5. With the aforesaid observation and direction, the writ petition stands finally disposed of. No order as to cost(s). Sd/- (Sanjay K. Agrawal) Judge Soma