Smriti Agrawal v. State Of Chhattisgarh
-1NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPS No. 4141 of 2019
1. Smriti Agrawal D/o Shri Sharada Prasad Agrawal Aged About 47 Years Working As Lecturer (Panchayat) And Posted At Govt. Higher Secondary, School Amlidih, Block Balod, District Balod Chhattisgarh.
2. Siddheshvar Kumar Yadu S/o Radheshyam Yadu Aged About 33 Years Working As Assistant Teacher (Panchayat) And Posted At Govt. Higher Secondary School Badegaon, Block Doundilohara, District Balod Chhattisgarh.
3. Yogendra Kumar Kumeti S/o Shri Meghnath Kumeti Aged About 35 Years Working As Lecturer (Panchayat) And Posted At Govt. Boys Buniyadi Aadarsh Higher Secondary School Garanji, Block Narayanpur, District Narayanpur Chhattisgarh.
4. Baba Ram Arya S/o Shri Arjun Singh Aged About 36 Years Working As Lecturer (Panchayat) And Posted At Govt. Higher Secondary School Gabdengal, Block Narayanpur, District Narayanpur Chhattisgarh.
5. Ishwar Prasad Kashyap S/o Shri Vishnu Ram Aged About 35 Years Workinga As Lecture4r (Panchayat) And Posted At Govt. Higher Secondary School Binjali, Block Narayanpur, District Narayanpur Chhattisgarh.
6. Rajat Kumar Das S/o Ranjit Kumar Das Aged About 31 Years Working As Lecturer (Panchayat) And Posted At Govt. Higher Secondary School Asebeda, Block Pakhanjur, District Kanker Chhattisgarh. ---- Petitioners
Versus
1. State Of Chhattisgarh Through Secretary, Department Of School Education Mahanadi Bhawan, Mantralaya New Raipur District Raipur Chhattisgarh.
2. Director Directorate Of Chhattisgarh Public Instruction Indrawati Bhawan, Naya Raipur District Raipur Chhattisgarh.
3. District Education Officer Balod, District Balod Chhattisgarh.
4. District Education Officer Narayanpur, District Narayanapur Chhattisgarh.
5. District Education Officer South Bastar Kanker, District South Bastar Kanker Chhattisgarh.
6. Chief Executive Officer Zila Panchayat Balod, District Balod Chhattisgarh.
7. Chief Executive Officer Zila Panchayat Narayanpur, District Narayanpur Chhattisgarh.
8. Chief Executive Officer Zila Panchayat South Bastar Kanker, District South Bastar Kanker Chhattisgarh.
---Respondents For Petitioners :
Mr. Ajay Shrivastava, Advocate For State :
Mr. Ishan Verma, Panel Lawyer Hon'ble Shri Justice P. Sam Koshy Order on Board
-217/06/2019
1. The grievance of the petitioners in the present writ petition is the nonacceptance of the past service rendered by the petitioners as Assistant Teacher (P) by the respondents for the purpose of absorption in the Education Department.
2. The details of the initial appointment of and petitioners and the subsequent appointment and the post against which they were appointed on two occasions are reflected in the chart as produced below: Petitioners'
Name Date of Initial Appointment Date of Subsequent Appointment No.1 20.10.08 (S. K. 2) 14.10.10 (S. K. 1) No.2 18.10.08 (S. K. 3) 14.12.10 (S. K. 3) No.3 01.01.08 (S. K. 2) 04.09.12 (S. K. 1) No.4 15.12.07 (S. K. 3) 21.09.10 (S. K. 1) No.5 28.06.06 (S. K. 3) 22.07.11 (S. K. 1) No.6 11.09.07 (S. K. 3) 19.12.14
3. For the purpose of grant of revised pay scale, the State Govt. has taken the past service rendered as Assistant Teacher (P) of the petitioners and has granted the benefit of revised pay scale on completion of 8 years service starting from the time when the petitioners were initially appointed as Assistant Teacher (P).
4. The grievance of the petitioners now is that though the Department has accepted the past service of the petitioners for the purpose of revised pay scale but for the purpose of counting the total length of service for absorption in the Education Department, the past service is not being considered.
5. This Court does not find any strong reason or ground on the part of the Department for not accepting the past service of the petitioners for the
-3purpose of absorption particularly when the department has counted the past service for the purpose of grant of revised pay scale.
6. Given the aforesaid fact, let the case of the petitioners be scrutinized by respondents 1 & 2 and an appropriate order be passed as to why the past service of the petitioners cannot be counted for the purpose of absorption when the Department itself has counted the said period for the purpose of revised pay scale. Let an order be passed by respondents 1 & 2 within a period of 90 days from the date of receipt of copy of this order. It shall be the responsibility of the petitioners to apprise respondents 1 & 2 so far as the order passed by this Court is concerned. The petitioners would be at liberty to file a suitable representation, if they so want, supported with all relevant documents.
7. With the aforesaid observation, the writ petition stands disposed of. Sd/- (P. Sam Koshy) Judge Ved