Dileep Kumar Komre v. State Of Chhattisgarh

NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR Writ Petition (S) No. 6529 of 2019

1. Dileep Kumar Komre S/o - Shri Somnath Komre, Aged About 46 Years Working As Lecturer (L.B.) And Posted At Government Higher Secondary School Anatpur, Block Makdi, District Jagdalpur Chhattisgarh

2. Dau Singh Diwan S/o - Shri Baliram Diwan Aged About 46 Years Working As Lecturer (L.B.) And Posted At Government Higher Secondary School Anatpur, Block Makdi, District Jagdalpur Chhattisgarh

3. Smt. Sushila W/o - Shri Manoj Sharma Aged About 46 Years Working As Lecturer (L.B.) And Posted At Government Higher Secondary School Anatpur, Block Makdi, District Jagdalpur Chhattisgarh

4. Ku. Suchitra Mandavi D/o - Lal Singh Aged About 40 Years Working As Lecturer ( Panchayat) And Posted At Government Higher Secondary School Anatpur, Block Makdi, District Jagdalpur Chhattisgarh

5. Subhadra Kunjam D/o - Hiralal Aged About 35 Years Working As Lecturer (L.B.) And Posted At Government Higher Secondary School Anatpur, Block Makdi, District Jagdalpur Chhattisgarh ---- Petitioners

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, Jagdalpur, District Jagdalpur Chhattisgarh

3. Block Education Officer, Makdi, District Jagdalpur Chhattisgarh ---- Respondents For Petitioners :

Shri Vinod Sharma, Advocate For Respondent/State :

Shri Ayaz Naved, Govt. Advocate

Hon'ble Shri Justice P. Sam Koshy Order On Board 28/08/2019 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 any opinion 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 Khatai