Jagmangal Singh Paikra v. State Of Chhattisgarh

NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPS No. 4849 of 2021 Jagmangal Singh Paikra S/o Late Bisahu Singh Paikra, Aged About 50 Years, Presently Holding The Post Of Assistant Internal Audit And Taxation Officer (Known As Gram Sahayak In The Time Of Appointment) And Posted At Office Of Janpad Panchayat, Korba, District- Korba (C.G.) ---- Petitioner

Versus

1. State Of Chhattisgarh Through- The Secretary, Department Of Panchayat And Rural Development, Mantralaya, Mahanadi Bhawan, Atal Nagar, District- Raipur (C.G.)

2. Director, Department Of Panchayat, Vikas Bhawan, Naya Raipur, District- Raipur (C.G.)

3. Collector, Korba, District- Korba (C.G.)

4. Joint Director, Treasury And Account, Bilaspur, District- Bilaspur (C.G.)

5. District Treasury Officer, District- Korba (C.G.)

6. Chief Executive Officer, Zila Panchayat Korba, District- Korba (C.G.)

7. Chief Executive Officer, Janpad Panchayat Pali, District- Korba (C.G.)

8. Additional Assistant Development Commissioner Korba, DistrictKorba (C.G.) ----Respondents For Petitioner :

Mr. Kishore Narayan, Advocate For State/respondents 1 to 5 & 8:

Mr. Neeraj Pradhan, P.L.

Hon'ble Shri Justice P. Sam Koshy Order on Board 13/09/2021 1.

The petitioner who is presently working on the post of Assistant Internal Audit & Taxation Officer under Janpad Panchayat, Korba is aggrieved of the action on the part of the respondents in not releasing

the second time scale pay which the petitioner is entitled for and for which there is already an order passed by the respondents vide Annexure P-3 dated 03.10.2015.

2.

The petitioner was granted the first time scale pay in the year 2003 w.e.f. 12.07.2003 and as such the petitioner became entitled for grant of second time scale pay in the year 2013. The grievance of petitioner now is that though Annexure P-3 is till date not modified or revised or cancelled so far as the petitioner is concerned, the benefit so granted vide Annexure P-3 till date has not been implemented or released to the petitioner.

3.

Without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the writ petition, at this juncture, stands disposed of directing the respondents 4 to 8 to immediately process the claim of petitioner and take an appropriate decision finalizing the claim of petitioner, at the earliest preferably within a period of 60 days from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. In case, the respondents, on scrutiny, reached to the conclusion that the petitioner is not entitled for the benefits, the respondents 4 to 8 should ensure a speaking order in this regard be intimated to the petitioner giving specific reasons and provisions under which the petitioner has been found to be ineligible. 4.

With the aforesaid observations, the writ petition stands disposed of. Sd/- (P. Sam Koshy) Judge Khatai