High Court Of ChhattisgarhWPS/4009/2021disposed off

Munna Lal Markam v. State Of Chhattisgarh

2021-08-05Hon'Ble Shri Justice P. Sam Koshy2 pages

-1NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPS No. 4009 of 2021

1. Munna Lal Markam S/o Baldau Markam Aged About 55 Years Working As Skill Attendant At Govt. Engineering College, Koni, Bilaspur District Bilaspur Chhattisgarh

2. Bhaskar Prasad Kamal (Suryavanshi) S/o Late Indal Prasad Kamal Aged About 61 Years Working As Skill Attendant At Govt. Engineering College, Koni, Bilaspur District Bilaspur Chhattisgarh

3. Bhupal Singh Maravi S/o Late Chhedi Lal Maravi Aged About 48 Years Working As Skill Attendant At Govt. Engineering College, Koni, Bilaspur District Bilaspur Chhattisgarh ---- Petitioners

Versus

1. State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Secretary, Department Of Higher Education In Technical, Mantralaya, Mahanadi Bhawan, Atal Nagar Nawa Raipur District Raipur Chhattisgarh

2. Director Directorate Of Technical Education Girls Polytechnic Premises, Byron Bazar, District Raipur Chhattisgarh

3. Principal The Government Engineering College, Koni, Bilaspur District Bilaspur Chhattisgarh ---- Respondents For Petitioner :

Mr. Ravipal Maheshwari, Advocate For State :

Mr. Suyash Dhar, PL Hon'ble Shri Justice P. Sam Koshy Order on Board 05/08/2021

1. The grievance of the petitioner in the present writ petition seems to be the inaction on the part of the respondents in not granting time bound pay scale which the petitioner is entitled for.

-22. According to the petitioners, they have put in about 23 years of continuous service on the same scale but they have not been granted time bound pay scale in terms of the circulars issued by the State Government from time to time so far as time bound pay scale is concerned.

3. Without entering into the merits of the case, subject to due verification of the entitlement part, the writ petition at this juncture stands disposed of directing the respondent no.2 & 3 to immediately process the claim of the petitioners so far as grant of time bound pay scale is concerned.

4. Let an appropriate decision in this regard be taken at the earliest preferably within 60 days.

5. The petitioner in addition would be at liberty to make fresh representation supported with all relevant documents.

6. With the aforesaid observation, the writ petition stands disposed of. Sd/- (P. Sam Koshy) Judge Rohit