Smt. Sangeeta Devi v. State Of Chhattisgarh

NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPS No. 4818 of 2020 1.

Smt. Sangeeta Devi W/o Late Shri Ajay Kumar Aged About 34 Years Occupation - Constable (M), Presently Working Under The Special Branch Police Head Quarter, Raipur District Raipur Chhattisgarh.

2.

Nitish Rawate S/o Kamalkant Rawate Aged About 21 Years Occupation Constable (M), Presently Working Under The Special Branch Police Head Quarter, Raipur District Raipur Chhattisgarh. Dakshesh Sahu S/o Late Rohit Sahu Aged About 21 Years Occupation Constable (M), Presently Working Under The Special Branch Police Head Quarter, Raipur District Raipur Chhattisgarh. 4.

Smt. Nileshwari Premi W/o Late Devnarayan Premi Aged About 30 Years Occupation Constable (M), Presently Working Under The Special Branch Police Head Quarter, Raipur District Raipur Chhattisgarh 5.

Smt. Anupama Pathak W/o Late Vijeyndra Pathak Aged About 29 Years Occupation Constable (M), Presently Working Under The General Branch Police Head Quarter, Raipur District Raipur Chhattisgarh 6.

Smt. Laxmi Gautam W/o Late Dharmendra Gautam Aged About 34 Years Occupation Constable (M), Presently Working Under The General Branch Police Head Quarter, Raipur District Raipur Chhattisgarh 7.

Smt. M. Rani W/o Late M. Naveen Aged About 33 Years Occupation Constable (M), Presently Working Under The General Branch Police Head Quarter, Raipur District Raipur Chhattisgarh. 8.

Smt. Anita Mahilkar W/o Late Hemant Kumar Aged About 29 Years Occupation Constable (M), Presently Working Under The Office Of Superintendent Of Police Durg District Durg Chhattisgarh 9.

Kanishka Singh Baghel D/o Late Nitya Prakash Singh Aged About 25 Years Occupation - Constable (M), Presently Working Under The Special Branch Police Head Quarter, Raipur District Raipur Chhattisgarh 10.

Hemant Thakur S/o Late Gaukaran Singh Thakur Aged About 27 Years Occupation - Constable (M), Presently Working Under The Special Branch Police Head Quarter, Raipur District Raipur Chhattisgarh ---- Petitioners

Versus

1.

State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Secretary, Home Affairs, Police Department, Mahanadi Bhawan, Atal Nagar, Mantralaya, District Raipur Chhattisgarh.

2.

State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Secretary, Finance Department, Mahanadi Bhawan, Atal Nagar Mantralaya, District Raipur Chhattisgarh.

The Director General Of Police Police Head Quarters, Atal Nagar, District Raipur Chhattisgarh ---- Respondents For Petitioners :

Mr. Prakash Tiwari, Advocate For State :

Mr. Chandresh Shrivastava, Dy. A.G.

Hon'ble Shri Justice P. Sam Koshy Order on Board 16/12/2020 1.

Grievance of the Petitioners is that, the Petitioners working as Constable/Head Constable (Ministerial) and posted at Raipur/Durg under the Respondents is being denied the grant of ad-hoc pay increase which has been granted to other similarly placed persons but who were not in Ministerial cadre.

2.

Counsel for the Petitioners submits that the grievance involved in the present writ petition has already been adjudicated upon in favour of the other similarly placed persons in Writ Petition (S) No. 4563 of 2006 [Abdul Nawab Khan & Others v. The State of Chhattisgarh & Others], decided on 7.5.2009. The judgment passed by this Court in Writ Petition (S) No. 4563 of 2006 has been affirmed even up till the stage of Supreme Court. Subsequently, another batch of petitioners filed a writ petition i.e., Writ Petition No. 4523 of 2014 [Francis Xavier Back & Others v. State of Chhattisgarh & Others], and the said writ petition also got disposed on 3.7.2015, granting the benefit which has been extended to the other similarly placed persons in the light of the decision rendered

in the case of Abdul Nawab Khan (supra). Counsel for the Petitioners therefore prays that the Respondents may further be directed to consider the case of the Petitioners also in similar line. Counsel for the State does not oppose the same. 4.

Accordingly, the present writ petition is also disposed of in similar line as in the case of Francis Xavier Back & Others v. State of Chhattisgarh, decided on 3.7.2015 in Writ Petition (S) No. 4523 of 2014.

5.

In case, if the Petitioners are found eligible, the relief as sought for may be released to them forthwith and if Respondents find that the Petitioners are not entitled, they may be suitably intimated in this regard giving reasons for their not entitlement. 6.

Let this exercise be done within a period of 90 days from the date of the Petitioners presenting the certified copy of this order before the respondent authorities.

7.

With the aforesaid directions, the writ petition finally stands disposed of.

Sd/- (P. Sam Koshy) Judge Ved