Shivnarayan Yadav v. State Of Chhattisgarh

NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR WPS No. 8715 of 2019 • Shivnarayan Yadav, S/o Shri Dashrath Prasad Yadav, Aged About 42 Years, Working On The Post Of Lecturer (TLB), At Government Higher Secondary School, Soranga, District Koriya Chhattisgarh. ---- Petitioner

Versus

1. State Of Chhattisgarh, Through Its Secretary, Department Of School Education Ministry At Mahanadi Bhawan, New Raipur Atal Nagar, District Raipur Chhattisgarh.

2. State Of Chhattisgarh Through Its Secretary, Department Of Panchayat And Rural Development, Ministry At Mahanadi Bhawan, New Raipur Atal Nagar, District Raipur Chhattisgarh.

3. Collector Baikunthpur, District Koriya Chhattisgarh.

4. District Education Officer Baikunthpur, District Koriya Chhattisgarh.

5. Chief Executive Officer Zila Panchayat Baikunthpur, District Koriya Chhattisgarh.

---- Respondents For Petitioner :

Shri Jai Prakash Shukla, Advocate For Respondents/ State :

Shri Kunal Das, Panel Lawyer Hon'ble Shri Justice Goutam Bhaduri Order On Board 22/10/2019

1. Heard.

2. The limited prayer which the petitioner has 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.

3. The claim of the petitioner is based on the fact that the nature of duties

discharged by him as Shiksha Karmis is 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 petitioner. The petitioner in this regard has made representation to the respondent which is marked as Annexure P-4.

4. 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 they so prefer.

5. 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/- Goutam Bhaduri Judge Jyoti