High Court Of ChhattisgarhWPS/2005/2021disposed off

Shashibhusan Paigore, v. State Of Chhattisgarh,

2021-03-24Hon'Ble Shri Justice P. Sam Koshy2 pages

NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR WPS No. 2005 of 2021 • Shashibhusan Paigore, S/o Shri R.D. Paigore, Aged About 50 Years Working As Lecturer (L.B.), Government High School, Parsada, Block Pali, District Korba Chhattisgarh., District : Korba, Chhattisgarh ---- Petitioner

Versus

1. State Of Chhattisgarh, Through The Secretary, Department Of Urban Administration And Development, Mantralaya, Mahanadi Bhawan, Naya Raipur, District Raipur Chhattisgarh., District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh

2. Commissioner - Cum - Director, Department Of Urban Administration And Development, Mantralaya, Indrawati Bhawan, Naya Raipur, District Raipur Chhattisgarh., District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh

3. Chief Executive Officer, Zila Panchayat, Korba, District Korba Chhattisgarh., District : Korba, Chhattisgarh

4. District Education Officer, Korba, District Korba Chhattisgarh., District : Korba, Chhattisgarh ----Respondents For the Petitioner :

Mr. C. J. K. Rao, Advocate For the State :

Mr. Sudeep Verma, Dy. G.A.

Hon'ble Shri Justice P. Sam Koshy Order On Board /03/2021

1. Heard.

2. The grievance of the petitioner is that he was appointed initially as Shiksha Karmi Grade-I on 20.10.2010, subsequently, her services were regularized on 20.05.2013, however, the State has

issued an order dated 08.03.2017 whereby it was ordered that the teachers who are not B.Ed/D.Ed pass shall not get the benefit of increment in pay-scale.

3. It is stated that the said issue has been set at rest by this Court in the case of Jayant Kumar Patle Vs. State of Chhattisgarh (WPS No.4271 of 2017 and batch of petitions, vide order dated 03.11.2017), wherein the requirement of passing of B.Ed/D.Ed degree was diluted, therefore, the petitioner is also entitled to get the benefit in respect of the law laid down in the case of Jayant Kumar Patle (supra).

4. Learned counsel for the State submits that the petitioner's claim would be examined after affording opportunity of hearing in terms of order dated 03.11.2017 passed in the case of Jayant Kumar Patle (supra).

5. Considering the aforesaid submission, this petition is finally disposed of, with a direction to the respondents for examination of petitioner's claim in terms of order passed by this Court in the case of Jayant Kumar Patle (supra) subject to verification of the facts and take appropriate decision thereon.

6. The writ petition stands accordingly disposed off. Sd/- (P. Sam Koshy) Judge Parul