High Court Of ChhattisgarhWPS/4774/2019disposed off

Smt. Roshani Sahu v. State Of Chhattisgarh

2019-07-03Hon'Ble Shri Justice P. Sam Koshy3 pages

NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR Writ Petition (S) No. 4774 of 2019

1. Smt. Roshani Sahu W/o Shri Umesh Kumar Sahu Aged About 30 Years Working As Assistant Teacher (Panchayat) And Posted At Govt. Girls Higher Secondary School Balod, Block And District Balod Chhattisgarh

2. Smt. Shail Kumari Deshmukh W/o Shri Dhanjay Kumar Deshmukh Aged About 32 Years Working As Lecturer (Panchayat) And Posted At Govt. Girls Higher Secondary School Balod, Block And District Balod Chhattisgarh

3. Mohd. Ashraf Tigala S/o Shri Mohd. Gaffar Gigala Aged About 33 Years Working As Lecturer (Panchayat) And Posted At Govt. Girls Higher Secondary School Balod, Block And District Balod 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 ---- Respondents For Petitioners :

Shri Vinod Sharma, Advocate For State :

Shri Arvind Dubey, P.L.

Hon'ble Shri Justice P. Sam Koshy Order on Board 03.07.2019

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 and the subsequent appointment of the petitioners 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 07.01.11 (S. K. 3) 29.10.11 (S. K. 3) No.2 03.08.10 (S. K. 3) 04.11.11 (S. K. 1) No.3 18.06.05 (S. K. 2) 11.12.15 (S. K. 1)

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 purpose 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. (P. Sam Koshy) JUDGE Khatai