Manoj Kumar Tirkey v. State Of Chhattisgarh
NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR WPS No. 4666 of 2016 • Manoj Kumar Tirkey S/o Shri Jaipal Ram Tirkey, Aged About 42 Years Occupation- Service, Working As Shiksha Karmi, Grade Ill, (Asst. Teacher Panchayat) Government Primary SchoolTokrodand, Janpad Panchayat And Tahsil Dharamjaigarh, Raigarh, Distt. Raigarh, (Chhattisgarh) ---- Petitioner
Versus
1. State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Secretary, Department Of Panchayat And Rural Development, New Mantralaya, Mahanadi Bhawan, New Raipur, (Chhattisgarh)
2. The Collector, District Raigarh, (Chhattisgarh)
3. The Chief Executive Officer, Zila Panchayat- Raigarh, Distt. Raigarh, (Chhattisgarh)
4. The Chief Executive Officer, Janpad Panchayat- Dharamjaigarh, Distt. Raigarh, (Chhattisgarh)
5. The District Education Officer, District Raigarh, (Chhattisgarh) ---- Respondents --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- For Petitioner : Mr. A.N. Bhakta, Advocate For Respondent-State : Mr. Sangharsh Pandey, Dy. Govt. Advocate. --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Hon'ble Shri Justice Manindra Mohan Shrivastava Order On Board 09/09/2016 Heard on admission.
1.
Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner is working as Assistant Teacher (Panchayat) since 1999, neither he has been given Kramonnati nor has been given Samayman Vetanman (time bound pay scale) and therefore, he may be permitted to file representation before the competent authority for redressal of their grievances.
2.
To this, counsel for the State has no objection. 3.
Prayer appears to be fair and reasonable.
4.
Accordingly, the writ petition is disposed off. In the eventuality of making any representation by the petitioner highlighting his
grievances, the same is expected to be decided by the authority concerned expeditiously in accordance with law. 5.
It is made clear that this Court has not expressed any opinion on merits of the case and authority concerned would be at liberty to decide the representation in accordance with law. Sd/- (Manindra Mohan Shrivastava) Judge Chandra