Hori Lal Verma v. State Of Chhattisgarh

HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR WPS No. 1651 of 2020

1. Hori Lal Verma S/o Ramdayal Verma, Aged About 46 Years Working As Teacher (L.B.) At Government Middle School Charoda, Block Pallari, District Baloda Bazar Bhatapara Chhattisgarh., District : Balodabazar-Bhathapara, Chhattisgarh

2. Kedar Nath Verma S/o Chhabiram Verma, Aged About 37 Years Working As Teacher ( L.B.) At Government Middle School Bitkuli, Block Simga, District Baloda Bazar - Bhatapara Chhattisgarh., District : BalodabazarBhathapara, Chhattisgarh --- Petitioners

Versus

1. State of Chhattisgarh through Secretary, Department of School Education, Mahanadi Bhawan, Mantralaya, Atal Nagar Naya Raipur, District Raipur Chhattisgarh.

2. Director, Directorate of Public Instruction, Indravati Bhawan, Naya Raipur District Raipur Chhattisgarh.

3. District Educaton Officer, District Baloda Bazar - Bhatapara Chhattisgarh.

4. Block Education Officer, Pallari, District Baloda Bazar - Bhatapara Chhattisgarh.

5. Block Education Officer, Simga, District Baloda Bazar - Bhatapara Chhattisgarh. --- Respondents For the Petitioner : Mr. Govind Devangan, Advocate For the State/Respondents : Mr. Neeraj Choubey, Panel Lawyer Hon'ble Shri Justice Goutam Bhaduri Order on Board 12.03.2020

1. The limited prayer which the petitioner has sought in this writ petition is for a direction to respondent no.1 to take a decision on the claim of the petitioners for grant of two advance increments on their obtaining B.Ed/D.Ed. Certificate both prior to appointment as well as subsequent to the appointment, which is being otherwise provided to the Govt. Teachers.

2. The claim of the petitioners is based on the fact that the nature of duties

discharged by them as Shiksha Karmis are identical and similar to the Government Teachers and their services have also now got merged with the Education Department. Therefore, the benefits which are being extended to the government teachers should also be extended to the petitioners. Counsel for the the petitioners submits in this regard they have made representation to the respondents.

3. Given the nature of dispute and also the fact that the claim of the petitioners would require a policy decision on the part of the State Govt., this Court does not intend to keep the petition pending any further, rather the ends of justice would meet if the petition is disposed of with a direction to respondents 1 & 2 to take a decision in this regard as to whether the petitioners would also be entitled for a similar benefit as are being granted to the regular government teachers. It is ordered accordingly. Let this exercise be concluded within a period of 4 months from the date of receipt of certified copy of this order. It shall be the responsibility of the petitioners to bring the order of this Court to the notice of respondents 1 & 2 along with any fresh representation, if she so prefers.

4. It is made clear that this Court has not expressed anything on merits of the case so far as the entitlement of the petitioners are concerned. The respondents shall be at liberty to take a decision independently. Sd/- (GOUTAM BHADURI) JUDGE R a o