Afjal Ali v. The State Of Chhattisgarh

NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR Writ Petition (S) No. 4596 of 2018 Afjal Ali S/o Sarwar Ali Aged About 39 Years By Occupation Lecturer Panchayat Government H S S Abhanpur Block Narharpur, District Uttar Bastar Kanker Chhattisgarh.

---- Petitioner

Versus

1. The State Of Chhattisgarh Through Its Secretary, Panchayat And Rural Department Mantralaya, Naya Raipur District Raipur Chhattisgarh.

2. Commissioner Cum Director , Panchyat Sanchanalaya, Naya Raipur District Raipur Chhattisgarh.

3. Chief Executive Officer , Zila Panchayat District U B Kanker Chhattisgarh. ---- Respondents For Petitioner : Mr. Shalvik Tiwari, Advocate For State : Ms. Sunita Jain, Panel Lawyer Hon'ble Shri Justice Sharad Kumar Gupta Order On Board 16.07.2018

1. Heard counsel for the parties.

2. Petitioner has preferred this writ petition praying for a direction to the respondents to consider and count his earlier service for grant of revised pay scale without insisting upon NOC.

3. The petitioner was initially appointed as Shiksha Karmi Grade-II by Chief Executive Officer, Zila Panchayat, Dhamtari on 25.09.2006 and later on, he was appointed as Shiksha Karmi Grade I on 10.07.2008 and thereafter on 13.12.2017 he appointed as Lecturer Panchayat by CEO Zila Panchayat, Uttar Bastar, Kanker. The respondents are not considering his earlier service

for revised pay scale for want of NOC from earlier Panchayat.

4. Counsel for both the parties submit that the matter is squarely covered by the orders of this Court dated 28.11.2017 passed in WPS No.2530/2017 (Mukesh Kumar Patel and anr. Vs. State of Chhattisgarh and another) and order dated 26.06.2018 passed in WPS No.4138/2018 (Smt. Rashmi Singh Raj Vs. State of Chhattisgarh and another).

5. In view of above submission and the aforesaid orders passed by this Court, the present writ petition is also allowed with the direction that the petitioner is entitled to obtain the benefit of revised pay scale on completion of 8 years service by including the services rendered by him on a lower post or on the same post.

6. It is made clear that this Court has not expressed any opinion on the merits of the case.

Sd/- (Sharad Kumar Gupta) JUDGE L/-