Nanak Dev Baghel v. Chhattisgarh State Electricity Production Company Maryadit

NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR WPS No. 1312 of 2018 Nanak Dev Baghel S/o Harihar Das Baghel Aged About 55 Years Working As Supervisor Grade - 3 ( Electrical ) And Posted At Chhattisgarh State Electricity Production Company Maryadit, Madwa Tendubhatha District Janjgir Champa Chhattisgarh., District : Janjgir-Champa, Chhattisgarh ---- Petitioner

Versus

1. Chhattisgarh State Electricity Production Company Maryadit Through Managing Director Vidyut Bhawan Danganiya Raipur District Raipur Chhattisgarh., District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh

2. Chief Engineer ( Training ) Chhattisgarh State Electricity Production Company Maryadit Korba ( East ) District Korba Chhattisgarh, District : Korba, Chhattisgarh

3. Superintendent Engineer, Chhattisgarh State Electricity Production Company Maryadit Madwa Tendubhatha District Janjgir Champa Chhattisgarh, District : Janjgir-Champa, Chhattisgarh

4. Executive Engineer ( Human Resource ) Chhattisgarh State Electricity Production Company Maryadit Madwa Tendubhatha District Janjgir Champa Chhattisgarh., District : Janjgir-Champa, Chhattisgarh ---- Respondents Shri Shivkumar Guha, counsel for the petitioner/s. Hon'ble Shri Justice P. Sam Koshy Order On Board 09/02/2018 Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the grievance of the petitioner is with regard to non-grant of higher pay scale as the petitioner is entitled to get higher pay scale after completion of 30 years. It is submitted that the petitioner was due for the said higher pay scale from March 2017 onwards which has not been granted to him till date by the respondents. It is further submitted that the petitioner has repeatedly approached the authorities but the authorities concerned has not paid any attention to his representation. Counsel for the petitioner prays that the respondents may be directed to consider his representation (Annexure P/2). Considering the aforesaid facts, this Court is not inclined to keep this matter

pending and is of the view that this petition needs to be disposed off with a direction to respondent No.4 to take appropriate decision on the representation so made by the petitioner. In case, respondent No.4 is not the competent authority, respondent No.4 shall forward the representation of the petitioner to the appropriate authority to take decision.

With the aforesaid observations, this petition stands disposed off. Sd/- (P. Sam Koshy) Judge Deepti