← Library
High Court Of ChhattisgarhWPS/3858/2018disposed off

Juli Ksristina v. State Of Chhattisgarh

2018-05-18Hon'Ble Shri Justice Manindra Mohan Shrivastava2 pages

-NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR WPS No.3858 of 2018 • Juli Ksristina D/o Siman Pitter Aged About 37 Years R/o Gariyaband Road, Near Water Tank, Rajim, District- Gariyaband Chhattiagarh., District : Gariyabandh, Chhattisgarh ---- Petitioner

Versus

1. State Of Chhattisgarh Through- The Secretary, Panchayat And Rural Department, Mahanadi Bhawan, Mantralaya, New Raipur, District- Raipur Chhattisgarh., District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh

2. Chief Nagar Palika Officer Nagar Panchayat, Rajim, District- Gariyaband Chhattisgarh., District : Gariyabandh, Chhattisgarh

3. President Nagar Panchayat, Rajim, District- Gariyaband Chhattisgarh., District : Gariyabandh, Chhattisgarh

4. Head Master, Govt. High School, Rajim, District- Gariyaband Chhattisgarh., District : Gariyabandh, Chhattisgarh --- Respondents For Petitioner :

Shri Amit Kumar , Advocate For Respondent/State :

Shri Ramakant Mishra, Dy.AG Hon'ble Shri Justice Manindra Mohan Shrivastava Order On Board 18/05/2018 Heard.

1.

At the outset, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that grievance of the petitioner is confined only to the increment aspect and not with regard to any particular pay scale as such. According to him, increments have not been granted on the ground that the petitioner has not passed B.Ed/D.Ed examination.

2.

Learned Counsel for the petitioner submits that the issue with regard to withdrawal/non-grant of increment on the ground of having not passed

B.Ed/D.Ed examination was examined by this Court in the case of Jayant Kumar Patle v. State of Chhattisgarh (WPS No.4271 of 2017 and batch of petitions, vide order dated 03-11-2017) and various directions have been issued for affording proper opportunity of hearing and then decide the matter. 3.

Learned Counsel for the State submits that the Petitioners' claim would be examined after affording opportunity of hearing in terms of order dated 03-112017 passed in the case of Jayant Kumar Patle (supra). 4.

Considering the aforesaid submission, this petition is finally disposed of, with a direction to the Respondents for examination of Petitioners' claim in terms of order passed by this Court in the case of Jayant Kumar Patle (supra) and take appropriate decision thereon.

5.

The writ petition stands accordingly disposed of. SD/- (Manindra Mohan Shrivastava) Judge Tumane