High Court Of ChhattisgarhWPS/6659/2016disposed off

Nitin Kumar Khande v. State Of Chhattisgarh

2016-12-07Hon'Ble Shri Justice Sanjay K. Agrawal2 pages

NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR Writ Petition (S) No.6659 of 2016 Nitin Kumar Khande, S/o Ram Prasad Khande, aged about 30 years, presently working as Primary School Nawagaon, Block Masturi, resident of Village Nawagaon, Post Koudiya, through Jairamnagar, District Bilaspur (CG).

---- Petitioner

Versus

1. State Of Chhattisgarh Through Secretary, Department of Panchayat & Rural Development, Mantralaya, Mahanadi Bhawan, New Raipur, District Raipur (CG).

2. Director, Panchayat Secretariat Chhattisgarh, Indrawati Bhawan, Naya Raipur, District Raipur (Chhattisgarh)

3. Chief Executive Officer, Jila Panchayat, Bilaspur District Bilaspur (Chhattisgarh)

4. Chief Executive Officer, Janpad Panchayat Masturi, District Bilaspur (Chhattisgarh)

5. Collector, Bilaspur District Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh.

6. District Education Officer, Masturi, District Bilaspur Chhattisgarh. ---- Respondents For Petitioner : Shri Sanjeev Kumar Sahu, Advocate For State : Shri Gary Mukhopadhyay, Dy.G.A.

Hon'ble Shri Justice Sanjay K. Agrawal Order On Board 07/12/2016 (1) Heard on admission.

(2) Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner is working as Assistant Teacher (Panchayat) since last many years, neither they have been given Kramonnati nor they have been given Samayman Vetanman (time bound pay scale) and

therefore, he may be permitted to file representation before the competent authority for redressal of his grievance. To this, counsel for the State has no objection.

(3) Prayer appears to be fair and reasonable.

(4) Accordingly, the writ petition is disposed off. In the eventuality of making any representation by the petitioners highlighting his grievance, the same is expected to be decided by the authority concerned expeditiously in accordance with law. (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 representation in accordance with law. Sd/- (Sanjay K. Agrawal) Judge L/-