High Court Of ChhattisgarhWPS/5627/2019disposed off

Kumar Das Vaishnav v. State Of Chhattisgarh

2019-08-13Hon'Ble Shri Justice P. Sam Koshy2 pages

NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPS No. 5627 of 2019 Kumar Das Vaishnav S/o Ghunnu Das Vaishnav Aged About 49 Years Assistant Teacher (L B) At Government Primary School Akalghariya , R/o Ward No. 14 Bodla , Tahsil Bodla District Kabirdham Chhattisgarh., District : Kawardha (Kabirdham), Chhattisgarh ---- Petitioner

Versus

1. State Of Chhattisgarh Through Its Secretary School Education Department, Mantralaya, Mahanadi , Bhawan, Naya Raipur, Raipur Chhattisgarh., District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh

2. District Education Officer Kabirdham District Kabirdham Chhattisgarh., District : Kawardha (Kabirdham), Chhattisgarh

3. Chief Executive Officer Janpad Panchayat Bodla District Kabirdham Chhattisgarh., District : Kawardha (Kabirdham), Chhattisgarh

4. Block Education Officer Bodla District Kabirdham Chhattisgarh., District : Kawardha (Kabirdham), Chhattisgarh ---- Respondents For Petitioner :

Mr. Ghanshyam Kashyap, Advocate For State :

Mr. Anshuman Shrivastava, PL Hon'ble Shri Justice P. Sam Koshy Order on Board 13/08/2019

1. The limited grievance which the petitioner has made, is for an appropriate direction to the respondents to consider the claim of the petitioner for grant of two advance increments on account of his wife having undergone the family planning operation.

2. According to the petitioner, his wife has undergone the such family planning operation wayback in the year 1994 and he has got

appointment in the year 2005. However, the benefits of two advance increments have not extended to the petitioner.

3. Given the limited prayer that petitioner has made, let respondent No. 2 & 3 take an appropriate decision in the claim of the petitioner so far as grant of two advance increments is concerned on the petitioner's wife undergone the family planning operation.

4. Let respondent No. 2 & 3 take an appropriate decision within a period of three months from the date of receipt of copy of this order. It shall be the responsibility of the petitioner to apprise respondent No. 2 & 3 in this regard.

5. It is made clear that this Court has not expressed any opinion so far as the merits of the entitlement of the petitioner is concerned. Authorities are expected to take a decision purely in accordance with law.

6. With the aforesaid observations, the writ petition stands disposed off. Sd/- (P. Sam Koshy) Judge Rohit