Ramkrishnanath v. State Of Chhattisgarh

-1NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPS No. 3900 of 2021

1. Ramkrishnanath S/o Mangra Ram Aged About 45 Years Working As Peon, Government High Schook, Harrapath, Block- Manora, District- Jashpur, Chhattisgarh

2. Jeevlal Ram S/o Rusna Ram Aged About 47 Years Working As Peon, Government Middle School, Lukhl, Block- Manora, District- Jashpur, Chhattisgarh ---- Petitioners

Versus

1. State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Secretary, School Education Department, Mantralaya, Mahanadi Bhawan, Atal Nagar, Nava Raipur, District- Raipur, Chhattisgarh

2. Collector Jashpur, Collectorate Jashpur, District- Jashpur, Chhattisgarh

3. District Education Officer Jaspur, Office Of District Education Officer, District- Jaspur, Chhattisgarh

4. Block Education Officer Manora, Block- Manora, Tehsil- Manora, DistrictJashpur, Chhattisgarh ---- Respondents For Petitioner :

Mr. D. R. Minj, Advocate.

For State :

Mr. Kunal Das, PL Hon'ble Shri Justice P. Sam Koshy Order on Board 28/07/2021

1. Heard

2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioners are absorbed in the employment from the year between 1994-1997 and therefore, they are entitled to get the benefit of regular pay-scale after completion of three years of service. He further submits that the similar relief has already been granted to certain persons whose services were also regularised in the State Government. He refers to an order dated 10.01.2020 (Annexure P/4) and submits that in the likewise nature, few of the other persons who were similarly placed, have been given the benefit of regular pay-scale on completion of three years of service.

-23. At this juncture, learned State counsel submits that it would be better if the petitioners file detailed fresh representation to the respondent No. 3 along with all relevant documents in support of their claims including the orders of the State Government as also the orders of the High Court in other connected petitions. He further submits that in case the representation is made, the respondent No. 3 shall decide the same within a further period of three months from the date of receipt of such representation.

4. The proposal of the State counsel is acceptable to the counsel for the petitioners.

5. Accordingly, the present writ petition stands disposed off with liberty to the petitioners to file fresh representation to respondent No. 3 along with all relevant documents in this regard whereby similar benefits were given to other persons and on such representation being made, respondent No. 3 shall decide the same within a period of 90 days from the date of receipt of such representation.

6. It is made clear that this Court has not expressed any opinion so far as the entitlement of the petitioners is concerned. The authorities shall be free to take a decision purely in accordance with the rules governing the field.

7. No order as to cost(s).

Sd/- (P. Sam Koshy) Judge Rohit