Bharat Lal Dewangan v. State Of Chhattisgarh

NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPS No. 2714 of 2019

1. Bharat Lal Dewangan S/o Late Shri Dukhulal Dewangan Aged About 68 Years R/o Village And Post Bhedikala, Tahsil Rajnandgaon, District - Rajnandgaon Chhattisgarh ---- Petitioner

Versus

1. State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Secretary, General Administration Department, Mantralaya, Mahanadi Bhawan, New Raipur Chhattisgarh

2. Director Government Printing And Stationary, Second Floor, Block -1, Indrawati Bhawan, Atal Nagar, Raipur Chhattisgarh

3. Deputy Director Regional Government Printing Press, Rajnandgaon, District - Rajnandgaon Chhattisgarh

4. District Treasurer Rajnandgaon, District - Rajnandgaon Chhattisgarh ---- Respondents For Petitioner :

Mr. Neeraj Pradhan, Advocate For State :

Mr. P. Acharya, Panel Lawyer Hon'ble Shri Justice P. Sam Koshy Order on Board 10/04/2019

1. The claim of the petitioner in the present writ petition is for appropriate decision to be taken by the rspondents No. 2 & 3 so far as granting of time pay scale to the petitioner who retired from service of the respondents as a Assistant Web Offset Operator w.e.f. 31.03.2011.

2. The contention of the petitioner is that he was working as a Assistant Web Offset Operator was entitled for time scale pay on completion of the requisite length of service as per the circulars of the State Governmetn but the same was not processed and in between the

petitioner superannuated w.e.f. 31.03.2011. Thereafter, the petitioner had been making repeated correspondences with the respondents and the documents enclosed in the writ petition also shows that the petitioner was also duly processed by the department but thereafter, it appears that the respondents have not till finalised his claim any further.

3. Counsel for the petitioner submits that the respondent State Government has meanwhile granted the benefit of time scale pay to similarly placed employees and who were also granted the benefit much after their retirement.

4. Given the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case, this Court is of the opinion that no fruitful purpose would be served in keeping the writ petition pending rather ends of justice would meet if the respondents No. 2 & 3 are directed to take a prompt decision so far as granting of the time scale pay of the petitioner is concerned and subject to the verification of the records applicable appropriate decision be taken within an outer limit of four months. In case, if the petitioner is found to be entitled for the time scale pay then necessary instructions be issued granting all the consequential reliefs to the petitioners at the earliest.

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