Gajadhar Singh Lilriya v. State Of Chhattisgarh

NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPS No. 6307 of 2018

1. Gajadhar Singh Lilriya S/o Shri Rameshwar Prasad Lilriya, Aged About 48 Years, Occupation Teacher Grade 02, R/o Primary School Rani, Gram Rani, Thana- Parpodi , District Bemetara, Chhattisgarh.

2. Bhagoliram Mastake S/o Shri Bharatram, Aged About 43 Years, Occupation Teacher Grade 02, R/o Primary School Khaira, Gram Khaira, Thana Khamariya, District Bemetara, Chhattisgarh.

3. Smt. Tilvati Mastake S/o Shri Bhagoliram Mastake, Aged About 42 Years, Occupation Teacher Grade 02, R/o Primary School Bamhani, Thana Khamariya, District Bemetara, Chhattisgarh.

4. Shravan Kumar Sahu S/o Shri Gangaram Sahu, Aged About 48 Years, Occupation Teacher Grade 02, R/o Primary School Khamdih, Gram Khamdih, Thana Saja, District Bemetara, Chhattisgarh.

5. Santosh Kumar Verma S/o Shri Sukhlal Verma, Aged About 52 Years, Occupation Teacher Grade 02, R/o Primary School Kongiyakala, Gram Kongiyakala, Thana Perpodi, District Bemetara, Chhattisgarh. ---Petitioners

Versus

1. State Of Chhattisgarh, Secretary, School Education Department, Mantralaya, Naya Raipur, Chhattisgarh.

2. District Education Officer Karyalaye, District Eucation Officer, Bemetara, District Bemetara, Chhattisgarh.

3. Vikas Khand Shiksha Adhikari, Saja, District Bemetara, Chhattisgarh.

4. Mukhya Karyapalan Adhikari, Janpad Panchayat Saja, District Bemetara, Chhattisgarh.

5. Collector Bemetara, District Bemetara, Chhattisgarh. ---Respondents For petitioners :

Shri Abdul Wahab Khan, Advocate.

For State :

Shri S.P.Kale, Dy.A.G.

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

25/09/2018 1.

The grievance of the petitioners in the instant Writ Petition is that, though they were entitled for the benefit of Kramonnati as well as other benefits on having put requisite length of service with the respondents, the same has not been given to the petitioners.

2.

Counsel for the petitioners submits that, initially, it was granted to the petitioners, but subsequently, it was withdrawn without any reasons assigned. He further submits that, there are other benefits also which had not been granted to the petitioners. He further submits that, the petitioners have already made a representation to the respondent No.4 in this regard which is pending consideration and thus he seeks for direction to the respondent No.4 to decide the same at the earliest. 3.

The said prayer is not opposed by the State counsel. 4.

Accordingly, the Writ Petition stands disposed off with a direction to the respondent No.4 to consider and decide the representation which the petitioners have filed at the earliest preferably within a period of 60 days from today. In addition, the petitioners would also be entitled for making a fresh representation.

5.

The Writ Petition accordingly stands allowed and disposed off. Sd/- (P. Sam Koshy) Sumit JUDGE