Saman Kumar Ghritlahre v. State Of Chhattisgarh

HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR WPS No. 1203 of 2020 Saman Kumar Ghritlahre S/o Khulas Ram Ghritlahre Aged About 45 Years Working As Lecturer (Panchayat) At Govt. Higher Secondary School Chherkapur, Block Pallari, District Baloda Bazar Bhatapara Chhattisgarh., --- Petitioner

Versus

1. State of Chhattisgarh through the Secretary, Department of Panchayat and Rural Development, Mahanadi Bhawan, Mantralaya, Naya Raipur, District Raipur Chhattisgarh.

2. Commissioner Cum Director Directorate of Panchayat, Atal Nagar, New Raipur, District Raipur Chhattisgarh.

3. Chief Executive Officer Zila Panchayat Baloda Bazar Bhatapara, District Baloda Bazar Bhatapara Chhattisgarh.

--- Respondents For the Petitioner : Mr. Govind Dewangan, Advocate For the State/Respondents : Mr. Kunal Das, Panel Lawyer Hon'ble Shri Justice Goutam Bhaduri Order on Board -02-2020

1. The matter is heard finally with the consent of the parties.

2. The grievance of the petitioner is non-counting of the past service rendered by the petitioner prior to joining of present employment.

3. The contention of the petitioner is that the matter stands covered by the decision of this Court rendered in WPS No.2530 of 2017 (Mukesh Kumar Patel Vs. State of Chhattisgarh) as also the batch of writ petitions disposed of by this Court on 27.10.2018, the lead case of which being WPS No.6147 of 2018 (Shabnum Khatun Vs. State of Chhattisgarh) and other analogous petitions.

4. Counsel appearing for the respondents submit that probably the petitioner

as of now does not have minimum required length of service for grant of benefit that he has claimed for which otherwise has not been desputed by the counsel for the petitioner.

5. Given the facts, the writ petition stands disposed of with an observation that the petitioner on his completing the required length of service of 8 years shall approach the authorities in the department for the relief sought for and the authorities shall consider the same in the light of the decision rendered by this Court in the case of similarly placed persons and shall pass an appropriate order.

6. With the above observations, the writ petition stands disposed of. Sd/- GOUTAM BHADURI JUDGE R a o