High Court Of ChhattisgarhWPS/712/2017disposed off

Vishnu Kori v. State Of Chhattisgarh

2017-02-10Hon'Ble Shri Justice Sanjay K. Agrawal2 pages

NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR Writ Petition (S) No.712 of 2017 Vishnu Kori, S/o Shri Ganeshram Kori, aged about 39 years, R/o Village Amarpur, P.S. Pendra, District Bilaspur (CG). ---- Petitioner

Versus

1. State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Secretary, Department Of Aadim Jati & Anusuchit Jati Vikas, Mantralaya, Mahanadi Bhawan, Naya Raipur, Civil/ Revenue Distt. Raipur, (Chhattisgarh)

2. Commissioner, Department Of Aadim Jati & Anusuchit Jati Vikas, Chhattisgarh, Distt Raipur, (Chhattisgarh)

3. Collector, Bilaspur, Distt. Bilaspur, (Chhattisgarh)

4. Asstt. Commissioner, Department Of Aadim Jati & Anusuchit Jati Vikas, Chhattisgarh, Distt. Bilaspur, (Chhattisgarh) --- Respondents For Petitioner : Shri H.S. Ahluwalia, Advocate For State : Shri Prafull N. Bharat, Addl. Advocate General Hon'ble Shri Justice Sanjay K. Agrawal Order On Board 10/02/2017 (1) Heard.

(2) Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner is working on the post of Peon on monthly basis at collector rate and he is entitled for grant of pay scale as per circular dated 04th November, 2016 issued by respondent No.1/State Government and therefore, he may be permitted to file representation before respondent No.3 i.e. Collector, Bilaspur for redressal of his grievance and direction may be issued to the said authority to decide

the same expeditiously.

(3) Prayer appears to be fair and reasonable.

(4) In view of above, the petitioner is permitted to file representation before respondent No.3 i.e. Collector, Bilaspur. If such representation is made by the petitioner within 15 days from today, respondent No.3 shall consider and decide the case of the petitioner in the light of circular dated 04th November, 2016 preferably within a period of two months from the date of receipt of copy of this order along with representation of the petitioner.

(5) It is made clear that this Court has not expressed any opinion on the merits of the case and authority concerned would be at liberty to decide the representation of the petitioner in accordance with law. (6) With the aforesaid observation, the writ petitions stand finally disposed of. No order as to cost(s).

Sd/- (Sanjay K. Agrawal) Judge L/-