High Court Of ChhattisgarhWPS/4714/2018allowed

Mayank Kumar Tandon v. State Of Chhattisgarh

2018-07-23Hon'Ble Shri Justice Sharad Kumar Gupta2 pages

NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR Writ Petition (S) No.4714 of 2018 Mayank Kumar Tandon S/o Shri Naindas Tandon Aged About 30 Years Working As Teacher (Panchayat) And Posted At Govt. Middle School Sond, Block Berla, District Bemetara, Chhattisgarh. ---- Petitioner

Versus

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

2. Chief Executive Officer Zila Panchayat, Bemetara, District Bemetara, Chhattisgarh.

---- Respondents For Petitioner : Mr. Ajay Shrivastava, Advocate For State : Ms. Sunita Jain, Panel Lawyer Hon'ble Shri Justice Sharad Kumar Gupta Order On Board 23.07.2018

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, Kabirdham on 21.06.2010 and he joined on 24.06.2010 and thereafter he was appointed as Shiksha Karmi Grade II by the Chief Executive Officer, Zila Panchayat, Durg on 29.06.2011. 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/-