Brijraj Purohit v. State Of Chhattisgarh And ORS.

Ewngkagenmh (Q2;

IN THE HON'BLE HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH

AT BILASPUR VV}!

s r«1 é6%9 Brijraj Plfoiait S/o Late Shri PETITIONER Gadadhar Purohit, aged about years, Retired employee, R/o Khatkhati, Post Basna, District - Mahasamund (C.G.).

VERSUS

FUB1m*UOzUmEm :

1.

State of Ch attisgarh, Through, The Secretary, Department of Education, Mahanadi Bhavan, Mantralaya, i i New Raipur, DistrictRaipur (C.G.).

e 2.

Collector, Mah/gwnund, \J District - Mahasamund (C.G.) /'

District Education Offlcer, Mahasamund District Mahasamund (C G ) WRIT PETITION UNDER ARTICLE 2? OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA

mm(u§iga§1> ' mmmwm '

wmm @mwm SB Hon ble Shrl Manmdra Mohan 'ShrivastaVa, J.

24-12 14 Shn Mano] Jaiswal, ctiunsel for the petitioner/s. Shri Prasunn BhadUrI Govt Adv forthe State Learned counsel for t e petitioner submits that the benefit of regular pay scale has not een'granted to the petitioner from the isV'submitted that earlier the petitiOner Inltlal date of apporntment t '

had fied a petmon before th s Court m which a direction was Issued on 28/06/11 to consider p Ittoners representatton In the Ilght of orders passed by thrs Cou from time to time, but till date benefit has not been granted to the etitioner This Court has alrea y issued a direction to respondents to conSIdernpetitioners claim nd take a deCIswn Within a period of three months Vide orde dated 28/06/11.

lf the concerned respondent, obliged to corn ty the order of the Court, has not taken a'ny'decision inthe matter't en proper remedy of the petitioner is to .take appropriate steps to fil contempt petition rather than repeating the same petition The se nd petition is not maintainable and is accordingly dismissed, how' ver With liberty to the petitioner to take remedy for compliance of th direction issued by thisCourtearlier.

Sd/- Manindra Mohan Shrivastava Judge Deeptl