Smt. Liladevi Mahant v. State Of Chhattisgarh Through Secretary

NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPS No. 3660 of 2021 Smt. Liladevi Mahant W/o Shri Kunjal Das Mahant Aged About 59 Years Occupation Assistant Teacher Indra Gandhi Girls Primary School Raigarh, Residence Kelo Vihar Makan No. 1500/151, Thana Chakradhar Nagar Raigarh District Raigarh Chhattisgarh.

---- Petitioner

Versus

1.

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

2.

Secretary Panchayat Gramin Vikas Avam Shram Vibhag, Mantralaya Naya Raipur Chhattisgarh.

3.

District Education Officer Raigarh District Raigarh Chhattisgarh. ----Respondents For Petitioner :

Mr. Abdul Wahab Khan, Advocate For State :

Ms. Sunita Jain, G.A.

Hon'ble Shri Justice P. Sam Koshy Order on Board 16/08/2021 1.

Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the petitioners have filed an application that they were working prior to 1998 in the Panchayat Department and they were subsequently absorbed in Education Department. It is contended that the petitioners raised grievance that the amount was being deducted under National Pension Scheme (N.P.S.) from the salary and the N.P.S. has been implemented from 01.01.2004, whereas the petitioners have been appointed in the year 1998; therefore, the deduction under the N.P.S. cannot be made from their salary. It is further contended that the petitioners have made an application that the deduction may not be made under the N.P.S. and they should be allowed to give privilege

which was given earlier. It is further contended that the petitioners have made an application to the District Education Officer, which may be directed to be decided.

2.

At this stage, since limited prayer is made, the petitioners are given liberty to make a fresh representation redressing all the averments to the respondent No.3 within a period of 4 weeks, which shall be decided within a further period of 90 days from the date of receipt of the representation. It is observed that this Court has not made any observation on the merit of this case.

3.

With the aforesaid observation, the petition stands disposed of. Sd/- (P. Sam Koshy) Judge Ved