Takeshwar Singh Sudhakar v. State Of Chhattisgarh

NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR WPS No. 3374 of 2017 Takeshwar Singh Sudhakar S/o Late Bhawan Singh Sudhakar, Aged About 50 Years Caste Halba, R/o Village Limhatola, Post Office Gudum, Tahsil Doundi, District Balod, Chhattisgarh ---- Petitioner

Versus

1. State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Secretary, Tribal Welfare Department, Mahanadi Bhawan, Mantralaya, Naya Raipur, District Raipur, Chhattisgarh

2. Assistant Commissioner, Tribal Welfare Department, Narayanpur, District Narayanpur, Chhattisgarh

3. Block Education Officer, Narayanpur, District Narayanpur, Chhattisgarh

4. Treasury Officer, Treasury, Accounts And Pension, Narayanpur, District Narayanpur, Chhattisgarh ---- Respondents Shri Vasant Zokarkar, counsel for the petitioner/s. Shri Satish Gupta, Govt. Advocate for the State. Hon'ble Shri Justice Manindra Mohan Shrivastava Order On Board 27/07/2017 Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that as the petitioner had obtained the degree of D.Ed. during the service in the year 1997 with permission on his own expenses, his case is similar to those teachers who have been granted two advance increments vide order dated 12/11/2014 (Annexure P/3) on the basis of order passed in WPS No.1485/2013 ( Kedarnath Agrawal vs. State of Chhattisgarh ) vide order dated 12/12/2013.

Learned State counsel would submit that the claim of the petitioner shall be scrutinized on the basis of judicial order of this Court and subject to satisfaction that the case of the petitioner is similarly situated, appropriate relief as may be available to him would be granted.

3.

In view of above, I am not inclined to keep this matter pending. This petition is finally disposed off with a direction to the Assistant Commissioner, Tribal Development, Narayanpur to examine the case of the petitioner on the basis of order dated 12/12/2013 passed in WPS No.1485/2013 (Kedarnath Agrawal v. State of Chhattisgarh) and if the petitioner is found to be identically situated, same benefit shall be extended to the petitioner which have been granted vide order dated 12/11/2014 from the date of passing of D.Ed. examination. 4.

With the aforesaid observation, this petition is finally disposed off. Sd/- (Manindra Mohan Shrivastava) Judge Deepti