Gopan Kumar Guha v. State Of Chhattisgarh

HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR WPS No. 2056 of 2020 Gopan Kumar Guha S/o Late Shishir Kumar Guha, Aged About 67 Years Retd. Asstt. Grade- III, Water Resources Department, Raipur, R/o C/o Mr. P.K. Guha, Bajrang Chowk, Math Para (In Front Of Jai Traders) Raipur Pin 492001 ---- Petitioner

Versus

1. State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Secretary, Water Resources Department, Mahanadi Bhawan, Naya Mantralaya, Naya Raipur 492002 (Chhattisgarh)

2. The Chief Engineer, Water Resources Department, Mahanadi Project, Raipur 492001 Chhattisgarh

3. The Executive Engineer Water Resources Department, Mahanadi Project, Raipur 492001 Chhattisgarh ---- Respondents For petitioner - Shri B.P. Rao, Advocate.

For Respondent/State - Ms. Akansha Jain, Dy.G.A. Hon'ble Shri Justice Goutam Bhaduri Order 14/07/2020 Heard.

1.

Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner joined the service on 5/01/1988, thereafter he was entitled to get the increment from 5/01/1989. However, said increment has not been granted despite the petitioner became entitled to receive the increment and it has been granted from 2/11/1992. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that other similarly placed employees have been granted the increment irrespective of the fact whether they have passed out the typing or not and on the principle of parity the petitioner should also be granted the increment from 5/01/1989 to 2/11/1992. Learned counsel submits that under the circumstances, the petitioner may be given liberty to make a representation before respondents No.2 and 3 who in turn shall decide the

case and representation of the petitioner and if other similarly placed persons have been granted the increment, the petitioner may also be given the benefit of increment.

2.

Learned State counsel opposes the submission made. 3.

Considering the submission made by the petitioner, if similarly placed persons have been granted the benefit of increment, then after verification of the fact, petitioner's case may also be considered. The petitioner therefore is given liberty to make a fresh representation to the respondents No.2 & 3 within a period of four weeks from today and respondents No.2 & 3 thereafter may decide the same within a further period of six months. It is made clear that this court has not made any observation on the merit about the entitlement of the petitioner. 4.

With such observation, the petition stands disposed of. Sd/- (Goutam Bhaduri) JUDGE gouri