Baliram Kashyap v. State Of Chhattisgarh

NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR WPS No. 3 of 201

1. Baliram Kashyap, S/o Pandruram, Aged about 43 Years, R/o Village Kodebeda, Tahsil - Lohondiguda, Distt. - Bastar (C.G.)

2. Smt. Shnehalata, W/o Lokhuram, Aged about 40 years, R/o Village Thakur Anukul, Tehsil - Jagdalpur, Distt- Bastar (C.G.) ---- Petitioners

Versus

1. State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Secretary, Department Of Aadim Jati & Anusuchit Jati Vikas, Mantralaya, Mahanadi Bhawan, Naya Raipur, Civil / Revenue District Raipur Chhattisgarh

2. Commissioner, Department Of Aadim Jati & Anusuchit Jati Vikas, Chhattsigarh District Raipur Chhattisgarh

3. Asstt. Commissioner, Department of Aadim Jati & Anusuchit Jati Vkas, Chhattisgarh Jagdalpur, Distt- Bastar (C.G.)

4. Collector, Baster District Baster Chhattisgarh ---- Respondents For Petitioners :

Shri H.S. Ahluwalia, Advocate For Respondents/State : Smt. Astha Shukla, PL Hon'ble Shri Justice Sanjay K. Agrawal Order On Board By / 01 /201 (1) Heard.

(2) Learned counsel appearing for the petitioners would submit that the petitioners are working on the post of Peon/Waterman/Watchman/Cook on monthly basis at collector rate in various Schools/Hostels & Ashrams and they are entitled for grant of pay scale as per circular dated 04th November, 2016 issued by respondent No.1/State Government and therefore, they may be permitted to file representation before respondent No. 4 i.e. Collector,

Bastar for redressal of their grievances and direction may be issued to the said authority to decide the same expeditiously. (3) Prayer appears to be fair and reasonable.

(4) In view of above, the petitioners are permitted to file representation before respondent No.4 i.e. Collector, Baster. If such representation is made by the petitioners within 15 days from today, respondent No. 4 shall consider and decide the case of the petitioners in the light of circular dated 04th November, 2016 preferably within a period of two months from the date of receipt of copy of this order along with representations of the petitioners. (5) It is made clear that this Court has not expressed any opinion on merits of the case and authority concerned would be at liberty to decide the representations of the petitioners in accordance with law. (6) With the aforesaid observation, the petition stands finally disposed of. No order as to cost(s).

Sd/- (Sanjay K. Agrawal) Judge D/-