Smt. L. Jai Lalita v. State Of Chhattisgarh

NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR WPS No. 2232 of 2018 • Smt. L. Jai Lalita W/o L. Giri Babu, Aged About 34 Years Occupation Assistant Teacher (Nagar Nigam), Govt. Girls Primary School Brahmanpara Raipur, Police Station Purani Basti, Tahsil, Civil And Revenue District Raipur Chhattisgarh. Mo. No. 90391-70650, District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh ---- Petitioner

Versus

1. State Of Chhattisgarh Through Secretary, Urban Administration And Development Department, Mahanadi Bhawan Mantralaya Raipur, P.S. Kewli, Tahsil, Civil And Revenue District Raipur Chhattisgarh., District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh

2. Joint Director, Urban Administration And Development Department, Vyapar Vihar Bilaspur, Police Station Tarbahar, Civil And Revenue District Bilaspur Chhattisgarh., District : Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh

3. Commissioner, Municipal Corporation Raipur Police Station City Kotwali, Tahsil Civil And Revenue District Raipur Chhattisgarh., District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh

4. Commissioner, Municipal Corporation Korba, Police Station Rampur, Tahsil, Civil And Revenue District Korba Chhattisgarh., District : Korba, Chhattisgarh

5. Block Education Officer Dharsiva Raipur, Police Station And Tahsil Dharsiva, Civil And Revenue District Raipur Chhattisgarh., District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh --- Respondents For Petitioner :

Shri Ratnesh Kumar Agrawal, Advocate For Respondents No.1, 2 & 5/State: Shri Manish Nigam, Panel Lawyer For Respondent No.3:

Shri Arvind Shrivastava, Advocate For Respondent No.4:

Shri Dhiraj Wankhede, Advocate Hon'ble Shri Justice Manindra Mohan Shrivastava Order On Board 01/05/2018 Heard.

2.

At the outset, learned counsel for respondent No.3 would submit that the petitioner's claim for grant of promotion and salary for the period August, 2016 to May, 2017 shall be examined by the Corporation in accordance with the

existing rules and regulations regulating promotion of Assistant Teacher to the next higher post in the schools run under the control of the Corporation. 3.

In view of the aforesaid statement made by learned counsel for respondent No.3, to which, the petitioner also agrees, I am not inclined to keep the matter pending.

4.

Without commenting upon the merits of the case, this petition is finally disposed off with a direction to respondent No.3 to examine the case of the petitioner regarding grant of promotion as also grant of salary for the period August, 2016 to May, 2017 and take appropriate decision in accordance with law within a period of three months.

5.

Accordingly, the petition is finally disposed off. SD/- (Manindra Mohan Shrivastava) J U D G E Tumane