Jyoti Sen v. State Of Chhattisgarh

NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPS No. 4610 of 2018

1. Jyoti Sen W/o W/o Arvind Sen, Aged About 34 Years, R/o Ajad Chowk, Simga, District Baloda Bazar Bhatapara, Chhattisgarh.

2. Omeshwari Sahu D/o Thukel Ram Sahu, Aged About 35 Years, Posted At Govt. Girls Higher Secondary School Simga, District Baloda BazarBhatapara, Chhattisgarh. ---Petitioners

Versus

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

2. Chief Municipal Officer, Municipal Corporation Simga, District Baloda Bazar- Bhatapara, Chhattisgarh.

---Respondents For petitioners :

Shri Atanu Ghosh, Advocate.

For State :

Shri Rahul Mishra, Dy.GA.

Hon'ble Shri Justice P. Sam Koshy Order on Board 16/01/2019 1.

The dispute raised in the present writ petition is the nonconsideration of the case of the petitioners for grant of revised pay scale on completion of 8 years of service. The denial to the petitioners was that the petitioners have not completed 8 years of service under the same employer. 2.

The grievance of the petitioners was that the petitioners were initially appointed under the Urban Administration Department and subsequently applied for recruitment on the higher post under the Panchayat Department in the year 2012 and taking both the services, the petitioners have

completed more than 8 years of service and therefore they are entitled for the benefit of higher pay scale.

3.

The counsel for the petitioners submits that the issue involved in the present writ petition is squarely covered by the judgment of this Court in a bunch of writ petitions disposed off on 27.10.2018. The lead case of which being WPS No. 6147/2018 (Shabnum Khatun v. State of Chhattisgarh & Ors.) 4.

This aspect is not disputed by the State counsel so far as the matter being similar to the one passed in the case of Shabnum Khatun (supra). "

"

5.

Given the facts and circumstances of the case the present writ petition also deserves to be and is accordingly disposed off in similar terms to the order passed in WPS No. 6147/2018 (Shabnum Khatun v. State of Chhattisgarh & Ors).

6.

The writ petition accordingly stands allowed. The petitioners would be entitled for the benefit as prayed for subject to the verification of the case by the Department.

Sd/- (P. Sam Koshy) Sumit JUDGE