Mamta Gupta v. State Of Chhattisgarh

-1NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPS No. 1043 of 2019 Mamta Gupta W/o Satish Gupta Aged About 44 Years Presently Working As Lecturer (L.B.) Govt. Higher Secondary School Kharhatta, Block Bodla, District- Kabirdham, Chhattisgarh. ---- Petitioner

Versus

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

2. Commissioner-Cum-Director Directorate Of Panchayat, Atal Nagar, Raipur, District- Raipur Chhattisgarh.

3. Chief Executive Officer Zila Panchayat, Kabirdham, DistrictKabirdham, Chhattisgarh.

4. Block Education Officer Bodla, District- Kabirdham, Chhattisgarh. ---Respondents For Petitioner :

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

Ms. Astha Shukla, Panel Lawyer Hon'ble Shri Justice P. Sam Koshy Order on Board 18/02/2019

1. The limited grievance which the petitioner has raised in these present writ petitions by virtue of order passed by this Court in the case of "Mukesh Kumar Patel Vs. State of Chhattisgarh", WPS No. 2530/2017 decided on 26.11.2017 have been granted benefit of revised pay scale on completion of 8 years of service.

2. The counsel for the petitioner submits that the grievance which now remains is that the benefit is being provided to the petitioner prospectively and though the respondents have made a calculation which the petitioner was entitled for from the date of his completion of 8 years of service but no effective orders have been passed nor

-2have department taken any steps for release of the arrears of payment. The petitioner prays for appropriate direction to the respondents for releasing the said amount. According to the petitioner he had completed their 8 years of service in the year 2013 and accordingly he was entitled for the benefit of revised pay scale immediately on completion of 8 years of service. However, this benefit has been extended to the petitioner only from the year 2018. Thus, the present writ petition has been filed seeking for direction to respondents to consider the claim of the arrears of benefit between 2013 to 2018.

3. Without entering into the merits of the case and taking into consideration the judgment of this Court in the case of Mukesh Patel (Supra) which has also been affirmed by the Division Bench and taking note of the fact that respondents have complied with the order to the extent of granting revised pay scale to the petitioner, let respondents No. 2 & 3 take an appropriate decision at the earliest so far as release of the arrears of payment which the petitioner is entitled for. Expecting a decision from the respondents within a period of 90 days from the date of receipt of copy of this order the present writ petition stands disposed off.

Sd/- (P. Sam Koshy) Judge Ved