Rameshwar Lahare v. State Of Chhattisgarh

-1NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPS No. 166 of 2019

1. Rameshwar Lahare S/o Heera Ram Lahare Aged About 46 Years Presently Working As Lecturer (L.B.), At Govt. Higher Secondary School, Ranveerpur, Block S. Lohara, District- Kabirdham, Chhattisgarh

2. Roshan Lal Janghel S/o Shri Kanak Lal Janghel Aged About 41 Years Presently Working As Lecturer (L.B.), At Govt. Higher Secondary School, Surajpura-1, Block S. Lohara, District- Kabirdham, Chhattisgarh.

3. Smt. Reena Janghel W/o Shri Roshan Lal Janghel Aged About 30 Years Presently Working As Teacher (L.B.), At Govt. Middle School, Surajpura Van, Block S. Lohara, District- Kabirdham, Chhattisgarh.

4. Smt. Saroj Bala Banafar W/o Akhilesh Banafar Aged About 42 Years Presently Working As Lecturer (L.B.), At Govt. Higher Secondary School, Gourmati, Block S. Lohara, District- Kabirdham, Chhattisgarh. ---- Petitioners

Versus

1. State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Secretary Department Of Panchayat And Rural Development, Mantralaya Mahanadi Bhawan, Atal Nagar, Raipur, District- Raipur, Chhattisgarh

2. Secretary Through Department Of Education, Mantralaya, Mahanadi Bhawan, Atal Nagar, Raipur, District- Raipur, Chhattisgarh.

3. Director Directorate Of Chhattisgarh Public Instructions Atal Nagar Raipur, District- Raipur, Chhattisgarh.

4. Chief Executive Officer Through Zila Panchayat, Kabirdham, DistrictKabirdham, Chhattisgarh.

5. District Education Officer Through Kabirdham, District- Kabirdham, Chhattisgarh.

6. Block Education Officer Through S.Lohara, District- Kabirdham, Chhattisgarh.

---Respondents For Petitioners :

Mr. C. Jayant K. Rao, Advocate For State :

Ms. Sunita Jain, G.A.

Hon'ble Shri Justice P. Sam Koshy Order on Board 11/01/2019

1. The limited prayer which the petitioners have sought in this writ petition is for a direction to respondent no.1 to take a decision on the claim of the petitioners for grant of two advance increments on their obtaining

-2B.Ed./D.Ed. certificate both prior to appointment as well as subsequent to the appointment which is being otherwise provided to the Govt. teachers.

2. The claim of the petitioners is based on the fact that the nature of duties discharged by them as Shiksha Karmis are identical and similar to the government teachers and their services have also now got merged with the Education Department. Therefore, the benefits which are being extended to the government teachers should also be extended to the petitioners.

3. Given the nature of dispute and also the fact that the claim of the petitioners would require a policy decision on the part of the State Govt., this court does not intend to keep the petition pending any further, rather ends of justice would meet if the petition is disposed of with a direction to respondents 1 & 2 to take a decision in this regard as to whether the petitioners would also be entitled for similar benefits as are being granted to the regular government teachers. It is ordered accordingly. Let this exercise be concluded within a period of 4 months from the date of receipt of certified copy of this order. It shall be the responsibility of the petitioners to bring the order of this Court to the notice of respondents 1 & 2 along with any fresh representation, if they so prefer.

4. It is made clear that this Court has not expressed anything on merits of the case so far as the entitlement of the petitioners are concerned. The Respondents shall be at liberty to take a decision independently. Sd/- (P. Sam Koshy) Judge Ved