Arjun Singh Patel v. The State Of Chhattisgarh

NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPS No. 2697 of 2019

1. Arjun Singh Patel S/o Tulsi Ram Aged About 49 Years Primary School Totinandagara, Tahsil Antagarh, Disrtict- Uttar Bastar, Kanker, Chhattisgarh., District : Kanker, Chhattisgarh

2. Rajman Nureti S/o Rainu Ram Aged About 42 Years Primary School Badejaitpuri, Tahsil Antagarh, Disrtict- Uttar Bastar, Kanker, Chhattisgarh., District : Kanker, Chhattisgarh

3. Sukal Singh Kumeti S/o Itwaru Ram Aged About 34 Years Primary School Huchadi, Tahsil Antagarh, Disrtict- Uttar Bastar, Kanker, Chhattisgarh., District : Kanker, Chhattisgarh

4. Hariram Kumeti S/o Dukaru Ram Aged About 39 Years Primary School Kolar, Tahsil Antagarh, Disrtict- Uttar Bastar, Kanker, Chhattisgarh., District : Kanker, Chhattisgarh

5. Giriwar Baghel S/o Raghuram Baghel Aged About 39 Years Primary School Phoolpad, Tahsil Antagarh, Disrtict- Uttar Bastar, Kanker, Chhattisgarh., District : Kanker, Chhattisgarh

6. Santosh Kumar Sahu S/o Bodhan Lal Sahu Aged About 45 Years Primary School Pipara, Tahsil Antagarh, Disrtict- Uttar Bastar, Kanker, Chhattisgarh., District : Kanker, Chhattisgarh

7. Dharam Singh Pradhan S/o Bhukalu Ram Aged About 50 Years Primary School Kotkursai, Tahsil Antagarh, Disrtict- Uttar Bastar, Kanker, Chhattisgarh., District : Kanker, Chhattisgarh

8. Kejau Ram Bhuarya S/o Mehatru Ram Aged About 49 Years High School Tadoki, Tahsil Antagarh, Disrtict- Uttar Bastar, Kanker, Chhattisgarh., District : Kanker, Chhattisgarh

9. Purushottam Sonwani S/o Narayan Sonwani Aged About 44 Years Middle School Ghumar, Tahsil Antagarh, Disrtict- Uttar Bastar, Kanker, Chhattisgarh., District : Kanker, Chhattisgarh

10. Smt. Geeta Kaushal W/o Raghunandan Kaushal Aged About 35 Years Tahsilpara Antagarh, Tahsil Antagarh, Disrtict- Uttar Bastar, Kanker, Chhattisgarh., District : Kanker, Chhattisgarh

11. Suresh Kumar Markam S/o Vikram Singh Aged About 35 Years Primary School Bhaisabeda, Tahsil Antagarh, Disrtict- Uttar Bastar, Kanker, Chhattisgarh., District : Bastar(Jagdalpur), Chhattisgarh

12. Bajari Ram Uike S/o Jandel Singh Uike Aged About 48 Years Primary School Pandripara, Tahsil Antagarh, District- Uttar Bastar Kanker, Chhattisgarh., District : Kanker, Chhattisgarh

13. Ram Singh Koram S/o Sukra Ram Aged About 39 Years Primary School Himoda, Tahsil Antagarh, Disrtict- Uttar Bastar, Kanker, Chhattisgarh., District : Kanker, Chhattisgarh

14. Bineshwar Vaidh S/o Balram Vaidh Aged About 45 Years Primary School Amodi, Tahsil Antagarh, District Uttar Bastar Kanker, Chhattisgarh., District : Kanker, Chhattisgarh

15. Binesh Kumar Suryawanshi S/o Sahadur Ram Aged About 45 Years Primary School Pandripara, Tahsil Antagarh, District- Uttar Bastar Kanker, Chhattisgarh., District : Kanker, Chhattisgarh

16. Anita Negi W/o Ram Prasad Negi Aged About 44 Years Middle School Masbaras, Tahsil Antagarh, District- Uttar Bastar, Kanker, Chhattisgarh., District : Kanker, Chhattisgarh ---- Petitioners

Versus

1. The State Of Chhattisgarh Through Secretary, Panchayat Gramin Vikash Vidhag Mantralaya, Naya Raipur, Chhattisgarh., District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh

2. Director Panchayat Sanchalnalaya Chhattisgarh, Indravati Bhawan, Naya Raipur, Chhattisgarh., District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh

3. Chief Executive Officer Zila Panchayat Kanker, Disrtrict- Uttar Bastar Kanker, Chhattisgarh., District : Kanker, Chhattisgarh

4. Chief Executive Officer Janpad Panchayat Antagarh, Distrtict- Uttar Bastar Kanker, Chhattisgarh., District : Kanker, Chhattisgarh

5. Collector Kanker, District- Uttar Bastar Kanker, Chhattisgarh., District : Kanker, Chhattisgarh ---- Respondents For Petitioner :

Mr. Ajay Shrivastava, Advocate For State :

Mr. Jitendra Pali, Dy. AG Hon'ble Shri Justice P. Sam Koshy Order on Board 10/04/2019

1. Heard on admission.

2. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioners would submit that the petitioners are working as Lecturer (Panchayat) since 1998, neither they have been given Kramonnati nor they have been given Samayman Vetanman (timebound pay scale) and therefore, they may be permitted to file representation before the competent authority for redressal of their grievance. 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 petitioners highlighting their grievance, 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/- (P. Sam Koshy) Judge Rohit