High Court Of ChhattisgarhWPS/3493/2019allowed

Vinod Kumar Patel v. State Of Chhattisgarh

2019-05-08Hon'Ble Shri Justice P. Sam Koshy2 pages

-1NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPS No. 3493 of 2019 Vinod Kumar Patel Late Shri Kanhaiya Lal Patel, Aged About 30 Years Working As Assistant Teacher(Nagriya Nikay) And Posted At Govt. Navin Primary School Dhamdha, Block Dhamdha, District Durg, Chhattisgarh., District : Durg, Chhattisgarh ---- Petitioner

Versus

1. State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Secretary, Department Of Urban Administration, Mahanadi Bhawan, Mantralaya, Naya Raipur, District Raipur, Chhattisgarh., District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh

2. The Secretary, Department Of Panchayat, Mahanadi Bhawan, Mantralaya, Naya Raipur, District Raipur, Chhattisgarh., District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh

3. Chief Municipal Officer, Nagar Panchayat Dhamdha, District Durg, Chhattisgarh., District : Durg, Chhattisgarh ---- Respondents For Petitioner :

Mr. V. K. Sharma, Advocate For State :

Mr. P. Acharya, Panel Lawyer Hon'ble Shri Justice P. Sam Koshy Order on Board 08/05/2019

1. The dispute raised in the present writ petition is the nonconsideration of the case of the petitioner for grant of revised pay scale on completion of 8 years of service. The denial to the petitioner was that the petitioner has not completed 8 years of service under the same employer.

2. The grievance of the petitioner was that the petitioner was initially appointed under the Panchayat department and subsequently applied for recruitment on the higher post under the Nagriya Nikay and taking both the services, the petitioner has completed more than

-28 years of service and therefore he is entitled for the benefit of higher pay scale.

3. The counsel for the petitioner submits that the issue involved in the present writ petition is squarely covered by the judgment of this Court in a bunch of writ petitions disposed off on 27.10.2018. The lead case of which being WPS No. 6147/2018 (Shabnum Khatun v. State of Chhattisgarh & Ors.)

4. This aspect is not disputed by the State counsel so far as the matter being similar to the one passed in the case of "Shabnum Khatun" (supra).

5. Given the facts and circumstances of the case the present writ petition also deserves to be and is accordingly disposed off in similar terms to the order passed in WPS No. 6147/2018 (Shabnum Khatun v. State of Chhattisgarh & Ors).

6. The writ petition accordingly stands allowed. The petitioner would be entitled for the benefit as prayed for subject to the verification of the case by the Department.

Sd/- (P. Sam Koshy) Judge Rohit