Ravindra Kumar Kosre v. State Of Chhattisgarh

NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR WRIT PETITION (S) NO.6014 OF 2019

1. Ravindra Kumar Kosre S/o Late Shri Kartik Ram Kosre Aged About 43 Years Working As Lecturer (L.B.) And Posted At Govt. Higher Secondary School Pachpedi, Block Kurud, District- Dhamtari, Chhattisgarh.

2. Lalit Kumar Sahu S/o Shri Bisahu Ram Sahu Aged About 44 Years Working As Lecturer (L.B.) And Posted At Govt. Higher Secondary School Latalbod, Block Kurud, District- Dhamtari, Chhattisgarh.

3. Tekram Sonkar S/o Shri Jeevan Ram Sonkar Aged About 39 Years Working As Lecturer (L.B.) And Posted At Govt. Higher Secondary School Gudguda, Block Kurud, District- Dhamtari, Chhattisgarh.

4. Mithalesh Kumar Sinha S/o Shri Kanshi Prasad Sinha Aged About 36 Years Working As Lecturer (L.B.) And Posted At Govt. Higher Secondary School Pachpedi, Block Kurud, District- Dhamtari, Chhattisgarh.

5. Smt. Nivedita Thakur W/o Shri Bhupesh Kumar Thakur Aged About 50 Years Working As Lecturer (L.B.) And Posted At Govt. Higher Seconadary School Pachpedi, Block Kurud, District- Dhamtari, Chhattisgarh.

6. Pradeep Kumar Manikpuri S/o Shri Girwar Das Manikpuri Aged About 36 Years Working As Lecturer (L.B.) And Posted At Govt. Higher Secondary School Pachpedi, Block Kurud, District- Dhamtari, Chhattisgarh

7. Parasmani Sahu S/o Shri Deendayal Sahu Aged About 36 Years Working As Lecturer (L.B.) And Posted At Govt. Higher Secondary School Pachpedi, Block Kurud, District- Dhamtari, Chhattisgarh.

8. Kamlesh Kumar Kanwar S/o Shri Jagesar Ram Kanwar Aged About 36 Years Working As Lecturer (L.B.) And Posted At Govt. Higher Secondary School Pachpedi, Block Kurud, District- Dhamtari, Chhattisgarh.

9. Jitendra Kumar Sarpa S/o Shri T.R. Sarpa Aged About 41 Years Working As Lecturer (L.B.) And Posted At Govt. High School Tarragondi, Block Kurud, District- Dhamtari, Chhattisgarh.

10.Chandrashas Banjare S/o Kartik Ram Banjare Aged About 40 Years Working As Teacher (L.B.) And Posted At Govt. Middle School Tarragondi, Block Kurud, District- Dhamtari, Chhattisgarh.

...Petitioner(s)

Versus

1. State of Chhattisgarh Through Secretary, Department of School Education Mahanadi Bhawan, Mantralaya Atal Nagar New Raipur, District- Raipur, Chhattisgarh.

2. District Education Officer Dhamtari, District- Dhamtari, Chhattisgarh. ... Respondent(s) For Petitioners :

Shri Vinod Kumar Sharma, Advocate.

For Respondent-State :

Shri Jitedra Pali, Dy. Advocate General Hon'ble Shri Justice P. Sam Koshy Order on Board 13.08.2019 1.

The limited prayer which the petitioners have sought in this writ petition is for a direction to respondent no.1 to take a decision on the claim of the petitioners for grant of two advance increments on their obtaining

B.Ed./D.Ed. certificate both prior to appointment as well as subsequent to the appointment which is being otherwise provided to the Govt. teachers. 2.

The claim of the petitioners is based on the fact that the nature of duties discharged by them as Shiksha Karmis are identical and similar to the government teachers and their services have also now got merged with the Education Department. Therefore, the benefits which are being extended to the government teachers should also be extended to the petitioners.

3.

Given the nature of dispute and also the fact that the claim of the petitioners would require a policy decision on the part of the State Govt., this court does not intend to keep the petition pending any further, rather ends of justice would meet if the petition is disposed of with a direction to respondents 1 & 2 to take a decision in this regard as to whether the petitioners would also be entitled for similar benefits as are being granted to the regular government teachers. It is ordered accordingly. Let this exercise be concluded within a period of 4 months from the date of receipt of certified copy of this order. It shall be the responsibility of the petitioner to bring the order of this Court to the notice of respondents 1 & 2 along with any fresh representation, if they so prefer. 4.

It is made clear that this Court has not expressed anything on merits of the case so far as the entitlement of the petitioners are concerned. The Respondents shall be at liberty to take a decision independently. Sd/- (P. Sam Koshy) Judge inder