Sufal Ram Gawade v. State Of Chhattisgarh

NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR WPS No. 6741 of 2017

1. Sufal Ram Gawade S/o Shri C R Gawade Aged About 40 Years Assistant Teacher (Panchayat), Govt. Primary School Tuyegaon, District Kanker, Chhattisgarh.

2. Ramanuj Netam S/o Shri F R Netam Aged About 35 Years Assistant Teacher (Panchayat), Govt. Primary School Telguda, District Kanker, Chhattisgarh.

3. Smt. Parwati Tekam W/o Shri Kamdev Tekam Aged About 35 Years Assistant Teacher (Panchayat), Govt. Primary School Gumjhir (Nakapara), District Kanker, Chhattisgarh.

4. Ashok Kumar Teta S/o Shri K S Teta Aged About 40 Years Assistant Teacher (Panchayat), Govt. Primary School Bhanupratappur, District Kanker, Chhattisgarh. ---- Petitioner

Versus

1. State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Secretary , Panchayat And Rural Development Department , Mahanadi Bhawan, New Raipur, Chhattisgarh.

2. The Chief Executive Officer, Zila Panchayat, Kanker, District Kanker, Chhattisgarh.

3. The Chief Executive Officer, Janpad Panchayat, Charama, District Kanker, Chhattisgarh.

4. The Chief Executive Officer, Janpad Panchayat, Antagarh, District Kanker, Chhattisgarh.

5. Treasury Officer , Account And Pension, Kanker, District Kanker, Chhattisgarh.

---- Respondents For Petitioners Shri Somkant Verma, Advocate For Respondent-State Shri Adhiraj Surana, Dy. GA Hon'ble Shri Justice Prashant Kumar Mishra Order On Board

05/12/2017 1.

Learned counsel for the petitioners would submit that the issue involved in the present case is squarely covered by the judgment rendered by this Court in the matter of Ku. Girija Patel vs State of Chhattisgarh and others, passed in WPS No. 2791 of 2017, decided on 03.07.2017, in respect of similarly situated employee, whose transfer from the jurisdiction of one Zila Panchayat to other Zila Panchayat has been held to be without jurisdiction and illegal by this court in WPS No. 1273 of 2016 (Smt. Geeta Sukhdeve Vs. State of Chhattisgarh and others) and batch of petitions, decided on 23.12.2016.

2.

Learned counsel for the petitioners would submit that Ku. Girija Patel (supra) was also one of the aggrieved employee like the petitioners, who had assailed the order of transfer from one Zila Panchayat to other Zila Panchayast, which was set aside by this Court. Later on, Ku. Girija Patel (supra) filed another writ petition bearing WPS No. 2791 of 2017 claiming that she is entitled to salary for the period it was not paid to her for non-joining pursuant to the impugned order of transfer. That petition has been allowed vide order dated 03.07.2017 with direction to make payment of salary with effect from the date of transfer till the date of joining.

3.

Learned State counsel would not dispute the legal position and would submit that the case of the petitioners is similar to that of Ku.Girija Patel (supra), in whose favour order has been passed by this Court on 03.07.2017. He, however, would submit that it would require factual verification as to the date on which the

petitioners joined duty.

4.

In view of the aforesaid submission, I am inclined to allow this petition on the same terms as in the case of Ku. Girija Patel (supra) and direct the respondents to grant consequential relief including wages with effect from the date of transfer till the date, the petitioners joined their duty. Let necessary steps be taken in this regard within a period of 60 days from today. 5.

The writ petition stands allowed in terms of the order passed in Ku. Girija Patel (supra).

Sd/- Judge Prashant Kumar Mishra Nirala