Vidya Devi Bhatt v. State Of Chhattisgarh

NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR WPS No. 513 of 2020 • Vidya Devi Bhatt W/o Dipak Kumar Bhatt Aged About 56 Years Presently Working As Post Of Lecturer (L B), Government Higher Secondary School (Boys) Gandai, R/o Ward No. 07, Behind Cinema Hall, Gandai, Post Gandai, Tahsil Chhuikhadan, District : Rajnandgaon, Chhattisgarh ---- Petitioner

Versus

1. State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Secretary, School Education Department, Mahanadi Bhawan, Raipur, Chhattisgarh

2. District Education Officer Rajnandgaon, District : Rajnandgaon, Chhattisgarh

3. Block Education Officer, Chhuikhadan, District : Rajnandgaon, Chhattisgarh --- Respondents For Petitioner :

Mr. Anshul R. Shrivastava, Adv.

For Respondent/State :

Ms. Beenu Sharma,PL Hon'ble Shri Justice Goutam Bhaduri Order On Board 23.01.2020

1. The limited prayer which the petitioner has sought in this writ petition is for a direction to respondent no.1 to take a decision on the claim of the petitioner for grant of two advance increments on her obtaining B.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 petitioner is based on the fact that the nature of duties discharged by her as Shiksha Karmi is identical and similar to the government teachers and her service has 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 petitioner. It seems that the petitioner for redressal of the grievance, till date, not moved

any representation. Let the petitioner make a detailed representation to the respondents in this regard.

3. Given the nature of dispute and also the fact that the claim of the petitioner 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 petitioner would also be entitled for similar benefits as are being granted to the regular government teachers. It is ordered accordingly.

4. 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 petitioner to bring the order of this Court to the notice of respondents 1 & 2 along with any fresh representation, if the petitioner, so prefers.

5. It is made clear that this Court has not expressed anything on merits of the case so far as the entitlement of the petitioner is concerned. The Respondents shall be at liberty to take a decision independently. Sd/- Goutam Bhaduri Judge yasmin