Gajpati Sahu v. State Of Chhattisgarh

HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR WPS No. 3152 of 2019 • Gajpati Sahu S/o Shri Balmakund Sahu, Aged About 66 Years Retired Head Master At Government Primary School, Domadih (Kedar) Block Sarangarh, District Raigarh R/o Village Khanjari, Post Tadhipar, Block And Tahsil Sarangarh, And District Raigarh Chhattisgarh ---- Petitioner

Versus

1. State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Secretary, School Education Department, Mahanadi Bhawan, New Mantralaya, Naya Raipur, Raipur Chhattisgarh

2. Director Directorate Of Chhattisgarh Public Instruction Indravati Bhawan, Raipur, District- Raipur, Chhattisgarh

3. District Education Officer Raigarh, District- Raipur, Chhattisgarh

4. Block Education Officer Sarangarh, District- Raigarh, Chhattisgarh ---- Respondents For Petitioner :

Shri R.S. Patel, Advocate For Respondents/State :

Shri Ravish Verma, GA Hon'ble Shri Justice Goutam Bhaduri Order On Board 10/02/20

1. Heard.

2. The petitioner contends that he was initially appointed on 22.11.1973 as Up Shala Shikshak. Subsequently, on completing his tenure of time he was granted Rs.150/- per month stipend from 1979 to 1983. Thereafter, he was given a salary of Rs.300/- per month from 05.07.1984 to 05.07.1984. Subsequent to that he completed his basic training as was directed from 1982 to 1984 and having passed the training, he was granted regular pay scale from

18.09.1984 but not from initial date of appointment. Thereafter, the petitioner since was not given the required pay-scale he filed a writ petition bearing WPS No.3459/2012 wherein this Court on 23.08.2012 has directed to take appropriate decision. In compliance of the aforesaid order, the representation was submitted, however, the documents were not attached and as such for want of documents, the representation of the petitioner was rejected. Thereafter, along with all the requisite documents the petitioner filed the representation, which is filed as Annexure P-5 dated 08.10.2018 before the Director, Directorate Public Instructions and it is prayed that the same may be directed to be decided so that the petitioner may be granted the regular pay scale from initial appointment.

3. Perused the documents. It appears that the petitioner has filed the representation before the Director, Directorate, Public Instructions along with requisite documents. In view of this the Director, Directorate Public Instructions since already is in hold of the matter is directed to decide the case of the petitioner after considering all the documents within a period of 90 days from the date of receipt of this order.

4. With the aforesaid observation, the writ petition stands disposed of. Sd/- Goutam Bhaduri Judge Ashu