Parmeshwar Sahu v. State Of Chhattisgarh

HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR WPS No. 8980 of 2019

1. Parmeshwar Sahu, S/o. Shri Dayaram Sahu, Aged About 27 Years, Working as Assistant Teacher (Nagriya Nikay) And Posted At Govt. Primary School, Kachchedafai, Dallirajhara, District Balod, Chhattisgarh

2. Yogendranath Dewangan, S/o. Shri Puran Lal Dewangan, Aged About 31 Years, Working as Teacher (Nagriya Nikay) And Posted At Govt. Middle School, Naya Bazar, Dallirajhara, District Balod, Chhattisgarh ---- Petitioners

Versus

1. State Of Chhattisgarh, Through Secretary, Department Of Urban Administration And Development, Mahanadi Bhawan, Mantralaya, Atal Nagar, New Raipur, District Raipur, Chhattisgarh

2. Chief Municipal Officer, Municipal Council Dallirajhara, District Balod, Chhattisgarh ---- Respondents For Petitioner :

Mr. Ajay Shrivastava, Advocate For State :

Ms. Richa Shukla, Dy. G.A.

Hon'ble Shri Justice Goutam Bhaduri Order On Board 19.11.2019 Heard.

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 Karmi 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 petitioners 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/- Goutam Bhaduri Judge Ashok