Dukhiram Kerketta v. State Of Chhattisgarh

NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR WPS No. 4944 of 2021

1. Dukhiram Kerketta S/o Dhanshuram Kerketta 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, Pali, District Korba Chhattisgarh. ---- Petitioner

Versus

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

2. Director Department Of Panchayat, Vikas Bhawan, Naya Raipur, District Raipur Chhattisgarh.

3. Collector Korba, District Korba Chhattisgarh.,

4. Joint Director Treasury And Account Bilaspur, District Bilaspur Chhattisgarh.

5. District Treasury Officer District Korba, District Korba Chhattisgarh.

6. Chief Executive Officer Zila Panchayat Korba District Korba Chhattisgarh.,

7. Chief Executive Officer Janpad Panchayat Pali, District Korba Chhattisgarh.

8. Additional Assistant Development Commissioner Korba, District Korba Chhattisgarh.

---- Respondents For Petitioner :

Mr. Kishore Narayan, Advocate.

For State :

Mr. Ishan Verma, P.L.

Hon'ble Shri Justice P. Sam Koshy Order On Board 16.09.2021

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 J/-