Resham Kumar Dahariya v. State Of Chhattisgarh

-1NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPS No. 3798 of 2021

1. Resham Kumar Dahariya S/o Hari Ram Dahariya Aged About 40 Years Presently Working As Assistant Professor (Physics), Government Engineering College Bilaspur District Bilaspur Chhattisgarh

2. Navin Kumar Verma S/o Sevak Ram Verma Aged About 31 Years Presently Working As Assistant Professor (Chemistry), Government Engineering College, Bilaspur, District Bilaspur Chhattisgarh

3. Satish Kumar Gavel S/o Late Bodh Ram Gavel Aged About 34 Years Presently Working As Assistant Professor (Mechanical Engineering) Government Engineering College, Bilaspur District Bilaspur Chhattisgarh

4. Indrani Borkar W/o Shri Sonit Kumar Aged About 33 Years Presently Working As Assistant Professor (English) Government Engineering College Bilaspur District Bilaspur Chhattisgarh

5. Dr. Ram Narayan Dewangan S/o Shri Dashrath Lal Dewangan Aged About 41 Years Presently Working As Assistant Professor (Mathematics) Government Engineering College Raipur District Raipur Chhattisgarh ---- Petitioners

Versus

1. State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Secretary, Department Of Skill Development Technical Education And Employment, Mantralaya Mahanadi Bhawan, Atal Nagar Nava Raipur District Raipur Chhattisgarh

2. Commissioner Cum Director Directorate Of Technical Education Block 3, 3rd 4th Floor, Indrawati Bhawan Nava Raipur Atal Nagar District Raipur Chhattisgarh

3. Principal Government Engineering College Bilaspur, District Bilaspur Chhattisgarh

4. Principal Government Engineering College Raipur, District Raipur Chhattisgarh ---- Respondents For Petitioner :

Mr. Shashank Thakur, Advocate.

For State :

Mr. Amit Buxy, PL Hon'ble Shri Justice P. Sam Koshy Order on Board 26/07/2021

1. With the consent of the parties the matter was heard on admission stage.

2. The grievance of the petitioner in the present writ petition seems to be the inaction on the part of the respondents in not considering the claim of the

-2petitioners for grant of advance increments as stipulated in Regulations 2.22 of the AICTE Regulations, 2019.

3. According to the counsel for the petitioners, the petitioner no. 1 to 4 hold Post Graduation Degree in the different fields and petitioner no.5 holds PhD. Degree and therefore in terms of the AICTE Regulations, 2019, particularly in terms of the Regulation 2.22 the petitioners are entitled for certain advance increments which for petitioner no.1 to 4 is two advance increments and petitioner no.5 would be entitled for 5 advance increments. According to the petitioners, in spite of repeated request being made to the respondents, till date their grievance have not been redressed.

4. Given the limited grievance that petitioners havs and nature of relief sought for, this Court is of the opinion that writ petition can be disposed of directing the respondent no.2 to 4 to immediately scrutinize the claim of the petitioner and consider and decide their claim for grant of appropriate advance increments in terms of the Regulation 2.22 of the AICTE Regulations, 2019.

5. Let respondents after due verification and scrutiny so far as entitlement part is concerned, take a decision preferably within a period of 90 days from the date of receipt of copy of this order. 6.

With the aforesaid observations, the present writ petition stands disposed off.

Sd/- (P. Sam Koshy) Judge Rohit