Ghanshyam Kumar Sahu v. State Of Chhattisgarh

NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPS No. 6335 of 2018 Ghanshyam Kumar Sahu S/o Shri Ramadhar Sahu Aged About 50 Years Working As Teacher (L.B.) And Posted At Govt. Piparbhana (Te) Middle School Piparbhana (Te), Block Bilaigarh, District- Baloda Bazar- Bhatapara, Chhattisgarh.

---- Petitioner

Versus

1. State Of Chhattisgarh Through Secretary, Department Of Panchayat Mahanadi Bhawan, Mantralaya New Raipur, District- Raipur, Chhattisgarh.

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

3. District Education Officer Baloda Bazar, District Baloda BazarBhatapara, Chhattisgarh

4. Chief Executive Officer Zila Panchayat, Baloda Bazar, DistrictBaloda Bazar, Bhatapara, Chhattisgarh. ----Respondents For Petitioner :

Mr. U.P.S. Sahu, Advocate For State :

Ms. Sunita Jain, Panel Lawyer Hon'ble Shri Justice P. Sam Koshy Order on Board 26/09/2018

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 petitioner for grant of two advance increments on his 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 petitioner is based on the fact that the nature of duties discharged by him as Shiksha Karmis are identical and similar to the government teachers and his 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 petitioner.

3. Given the nature of dispute and also the fact that the claim of the petitioner 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 petitioner 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 he 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 petitioner is concerned. The Respondents shall be at liberty to take a decision independently.

Sd/- (P. Sam Koshy) Judge Ved