Aanand Prakash Tirkey v. State Of Chhattisgarh

-1NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPS No. 512 of 2019 Aanand Prakash Tirkey S/o Shri Bartholomius Tirkey, Aged About 43 Years, Working As Lecturer (Panchayat) And Posted At Govt. Hr. Sec. School Bhuneshwarpur, Ramanujnagar, District Surguja Chhattisgarh. ---- Petitioner

Versus

1. State Of Chhattisgarh, Through The Secretary, Urban Administrative And Development Departrment, Mahanadi Bhawan, Mantralaya, Naya Raipur, District Raipur Chhattisgarh.

2. State Of Chhattisgarh, Through The Secretary, Department Of Panchayat And Rural Development, Mahanadi Bhawan, Mantralaya, Naya Raipur, District Raipur Chhattisgarh.

3. The Chief Executive Officer Zila Panchayat Ambikapur, Surguja Chhattisgarh.

4. Commissioner Municipal Corporation Ambikapur, District Surguja Chhattisgarh.

---Respondents For Petitioner :

Mr. Manoj Mishra, Advocate For respondent No. 4 :

Mr. Bhupendra Singh, Advocate For State :

Mr. Rahul Mishra, G.A.

Hon'ble Shri Justice P. Sam Koshy Order on Board 24/01/2019

1. The dispute raised in the present writ petition is the non-consideration of the case of the petitioner for grant of revised pay scale on completion of 8 years of service. The denial to the petitioner was that the petitioner has not completed 8 years of service under the same employer.

2. The grievance of the petitioner was that the petitioner was initially appointed under the Panchayat department and subsequently applied for

-2recruitment on the higher post under the Municipal Council in the year 2013 and taking both the services, the petitioner has completed more than 8 years of service and therefore he is entitled for the benefit of higher pay scale.

3. The counsel for the petitioner submits that the issue involved in the present writ petition is squarely covered by the judgment of this Court in a bunch of writ petitions disposed off on 27.10.2018. The lead case of which being WPS No. 6147/2018 (Shabnum Khatun v. State of Chhattisgarh & Ors.)

4. This aspect is not disputed by the State counsel so far as the matter being similar to the one passed in the case of "Shabnum Khatun (supra). "

5. Given the facts and circumstances of the case the present writ petition also deserves to be and is accordingly disposed off in similar terms to the order passed in WPS No. 6147/2018 (Shabnum Khatun v. State of Chhattisgarh & Ors).

6. The writ petition accordingly stands allowed. The petitioner would be entitled for the benefit as prayed for subject to the verification of the case by the Department.

Sd/- (P. Sam Koshy) Judge Harneet