Keshav Prasad Patra v. State Of Chhattisgarh
NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR WPS No. 3090 of 2018 Keshav Prasad Patra S/o Shri Kartikeshwar Patra, Aged About 54 Years Posted At Government ITI Bastar, District Bastar Chhattisgarh., District : Bastar(Jagdalpur), Chhattisgarh ---- Petitioner
Versus
1. State Of Chhattisgarh Through Secretary, Skill Development Technical Education And Employment Department, Chamber No. 52/3, Mantralaya, Mahanadi Bhawan, New Raipur, District Raipur Chhattisgarh., District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh
2. Director Directorate, Employment And Training, Indrawati Bhawan, Block No. 4, First Floor, New Raipur, District Raipur Chhattisgarh., District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh
3. Joint Director, Employment And Training, Indrawati Bhawan, Bairan Bazar, Raipur, District Raipur Chhattisgarh., District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh
4. Commissioner-Cum-Secretary, Directorate Employment And Training, Chhattisgarh Block - D, First Floor, Indrawati Bhawan, New Raipur, District Raipur Chhattisgarh., District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh
5. Principal, Government ITI Bastar, District Bastar Chhattisgarh., District : Bastar(Jagdalpur), Chhattisgarh ---- Respondents Shri B.P. Banjare, counsel for the petitioner/s. Shri Ramakant Mishra, Dy.A.G. for the State.
Hon'ble Shri Justice Manindra Mohan Shrivastava Order On Board 17/04/2018 Heard.
1.
The present petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India has been filed for a direction to the respondents to grant regular pay-scale to the petitioner under the contingency services immediately on completion of three years of service from the initial date of appointment.
2.
Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is in employment since long and therefore they are entitled for grant of regular pay-scale after completion of three years service. He further submits that similar relief has already been granted to certain persons whose services were also regularized in the State Government in the year 2008. He refers to an order dated 10.03.2015 stating that the said order is in respect of identically placed persons. 3.
At this juncture, learned State counsel submits that it would be better if the petitioner file detailed fresh representation to respondent no.2 along with all relevant documents in support of his claim including the orders of the State Government as also the orders of the High Court in other connected petitions. He further submits that in case, representation is made, the authority -respondent no.2 shall decide the same within a further period of three months from the date of receipt of the representation. 4.
The proposal of the State counsel is acceptable to the counsel for the petitioner.
5.
Accordingly, the present writ petition stands disposed off with liberty to the petitioner to file fresh representation to respondent no.2 along with all relevant documents in this regard giving benefit to similarly placed persons and on such representation being made, respondent no.2 shall dispose off the same within a period of 90 days from the date of receipt of the representation. 6.
It is made clear that this Court has not expressed any opinion so far as the entitlement of the petitioner is concerned. The authorities shall be free to take decision purely in accordance with the rules governing the field. 7.
No order as to costs.
Sd/- (Manindra Mohan Shrivastava) Judge Deepti
Sd/-