Smt. Mradula Sarkar And ANR. v. State Of Chhattisgarh And ANR.

NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR WPS No. 2237 of 2015

1. Smt. Mradula Sarkar, Wd/O Late Shri S.S. Sarkar Aged About 61 years, retiered Assistant Auditor, Local Fund Audit, R/O Tarbahar Dipupara Bilaspur, Tahsil And District- Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh

2. Shaihun Minj S/O Late Shri Lorance Minj Aged About 61 Years, Assistant Auditor, Local Fund Audit, R/O Quarter No. 119, Yadunandan Nagar Tifra Bilaspur, Tahsil And District Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh ---- Petitioner

Versus

1. State Of Chhattisgarh Through : The Secretary Finance Secretriate Raipur, Chhattisgrah

2. Director, Local Fund Audit Raipur Block-1, 2nd Floor Indrawati Bhawan, New Raipur, Chhattisgarh, Pin - 492002 ---- Respondents For Petitioners Shri M.D. Sharma, Advocate For Respondent/State Shri P.K. Bhaduri, GA Hon'ble Shri Justice Prashant Kumar Mishra Order On Board 03/07/2015 1.

With the consent of the learned counsel for the parties, the matter is heard finally.

2.

The learned counsel for the petitioners would submit that both the petitioners have earlier preferred the writ petition being W.P.(S) No.3197/2014 claiming the benefit of second kramonnati/time pay scale, however, at that stage, the writ petition was withdrawn reserving liberty to prefer representation. He would submit that despite having

preferred representation, the respondents have not decided the same for last one year, therefore, the writ petition has been preferred. 3.

Learned counsel would further submit that the petitioners retired as Auditor in the Department of Local Fund Audit under the Finance Ministry of the Government of Chhattisgarh. During their service career, the petitioners were entitled to second kramonnati/time pay scale on completion of 20 years service, however, they have not been granted the said benefit. Learned counsel for the petitioner would further submit that under the State Government's circular, even a retired employee is entitled to get the said benefit, if he was eligible for time pay scale during his service career.

4.

Considering the issue brought before this Court, the writ petition is disposed of with a direction that in the event, the petitioners prefer fresh representation before the competent authority, within a period of one month from today claiming time pay scale, the competent authority shall consider and decide the same at the earliest, preferably within a period of 4 months from the date of submission of the representation. In the event of any adverse decision, the petitioners would be at liberty to move again before this Court.

Sd/- JUDGE PRASHANT KUMAR MISHRA Nirala