Mrs. Anju Singh v. The State Of Chhattisgarh

-1NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPS No. 6372 of 2019

1. Mrs. Anju Singh, W/o - Mr. Shailendra Singh, Aged About 41 Years, By Occupation: Lecturer Nagriya Nikay, Government High School Sumedha, Block: Khatghora, District: Korba, Chhattisgarh ---- Petitioner

Versus

1. The State Of Chhattisgarh Through Its Secretary, Urban Administration Development Department, Mantralaya, Naya Raipur District Raipur Chhattisgarh

2. Secretary, Panchayat And Rural Development Department, Mantralaya, Naya Raipur, District Raipur Chhattisgarh

3. Zila Panchayat, Through Chief Executive Officer, Zila Panchayat Korba , District Korba Chhattisgarh

4. Municipal Corporation, Through Its Commissioner, Municipal Corporation Korba, District Korba Chhattisgarh ---Respondents For Petitioner :

Mr. Parag Kotecha, Advocate For State :

Mr. P. Acharya, Panel Lawyer For Respondent No. 4 :

Mr. Pankaj Agrawal, Advocate Hon'ble Shri Justice P. Sam Koshy Order on Board 26.08.2019

1. The default pointed out by the Registry, as of now stands ignored, with the consent of parties, the matter is heard finally at motion stage.

2. The dispute raised in the present Writ Petition is the nonconsideration of the case of the petitioner for grant of revised pay scale on completion of 8 years of service. The denial to the petitioner was that the petitioner has not completed 8 years of service under the same employer.

-23. The grievance of the petitioner was that, she was initially appointed under the Panchayat department and subsequently applied for recruitment on the higher post under the Municipal Council in the year 2013 and taking both the services, the petitioner has completed more than 8 years of service and therefore she is entitled for the benefit of higher pay scale.

4. The counsel for the petitioner submits that the issue involved in the present writ petition is squarely covered by the judgment of this Court in a bunch of writ petitions disposed off on 27.10.2018. The lead case of which being WPS No. 6147/2018 (Shabnum Khatun v. State of Chhattisgarh & Ors.)

5. This aspect is not disputed by the State counsel so far as the matter being similar to the one passed in the case of "Shabnum Khatun" (supra).

6. Given the facts and circumstances of the case the present Writ Petition also deserves to be and is accordingly disposed off in similar terms to the order passed in WPS No. 6147/2018 (Shabnum Khatun v. State of Chhattisgarh & Ors).

7. The writ petition accordingly stands allowed. The petitioner would be entitled for the benefit as prayed for subject to the verification of the case by the Department.

Sd/- (P. Sam Koshy) Judge Rahul