Smt. Kanchan Mehar v. State Of Chhattisgarh

NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPS No. 5801 of 2019

1. Smt. Kanchan Mehar, W/o Satyam Mehar, Aged About 30 Years, Working As Assistant, Teacher (Nagriy Nikay) At Govt. Primary School, Akharabhata, Sakti, District Janjgir Champa Chhattisgarh

2. Smt. Savita Tiwari, W/o Mukesh Tiwari, Aged About 46 Years, Working As Lecturer (Nagriy Nikay) At Govt. Girls Higher Secondary School Sakti, District Janjgir - Champa Chhattisgarh ---- Petitioners

Versus

1. State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Secretary, Department Of Urban Administration And Development, Mahanadi Bhawan, Mantralaya, Naya Raipur Chhattisgarh

2. Secretary, Department Of School Education Mahanadi Bhawan, Mantralaya Naya Raipur, District Raipur Chhattisgarh

3. Director Directorate Of Public Instruction Indrawati Bhawan, Atal Nagar, New Raipur, District Raipur Chhattisgarh

4. District Education Officer Sakti District Janjgir Champa Chhattisgarh

5. Chief Municipal Officer Municipal Council Sakti, District Janjgir Champa Chhattisgarh ---- Respondents For Petitioners :

Mr. Govind Dewangan, Advocate For State :

Mr. Chandresh Shrivastava, Dy. A.G.

Hon'ble Shri Justice P. Sam Koshy Order on Board 06.08.2019

1. The grievance of the petitioners in the present Writ Petition is the nonacceptance of the past service rendered by the petitioners as Assistant Teacher (P) by the respondents for the purpose of absorption in the Education Department.

2. The details of the initial appointment of petitioners and the subsequent appointment and the post against which they were appointed on two occasions are reflected in the chart as produced below: Petitioners'

Date of Initial Later appointment Name Appointment 15.06.2010 22.06.2012 SK Gr.-3 SK Gr.- 3 01.10.2008 01.08.2012 SK Gr.-1 Note: S.K. (Shiksha Karmi) SK Gr.-3

3. For the purpose of grant of revised pay scale, the State Govt. has taken the past service rendered as Assistant Teacher (P) of the petitioners and has granted the benefit of revised pay scale on completion of 8 years service starting from the time when the petitioners were initially appointed as Assistant Teacher (P).

4. The grievance of the petitioners now is that, though the Department has accepted the past service of the petitioners for the purpose of revised pay scale but for the purpose of counting the total length of service for absorption in the Education Department, the past service is

not being considered.

5. This Court does not find any strong reason or ground on the part of the Department for not accepting the past service of the petitioners for the purpose of absorption, particularly when the department has counted the past service for the purpose of grant of revised pay scale.

6. Given the aforesaid fact, let the case of the petitioners be scrutinized by Respondents 1 & 2 and an appropriate order be passed as to why the past service of the petitioners cannot be counted for the purpose of absorption when the Department itself has counted the said period for the purpose of revised pay scale. Let an order be passed by Respondents 1 & 2 within a period of 90 days from the date of receipt of copy of this Order. It shall be the responsibility of the petitioners to apprise Respondents No. 1 & 2, so far as the order passed by this Court is concerned. The petitioners would be at liberty to file a suitable representation, if they so want, supported with all relevant documents.

7. With the aforesaid observation, the Writ Petition stands disposed of. Sd/- (P. Sam Koshy) JUDGE Rahul