Mrs. Bharti Dewangan v. State Of Chhattisgarh

NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR WPS No. 8959 of 2019

1. Mrs. Bharti Dewangan, W/o Mr. Chandrakant Dewangan, Aged About 53 Years, Post Lecturer ( Local Body ), Posted At- Government Higher Secondary School, Korar, Block Bhanupratappur, District Uttar Bastar Kanker Chhattisgarh.

2. Tameshwari Kodopi, W/o Mr. Anil Kumar Kodopi, Aged About 37 Years, Post Lecturer ( Local Body ), Posted At - Government Higher Secondary School Puri Block Charama, District Uttar Bastar Kanker Chhattisgarh.

3. Mrs. Pramila Korram, W/o Mr. Arvind Korram, Aged About 39 Years, Post Lecturer ( Local Body ), Posted At- Government High School, Bhilai, Block Charama , District Uttar Bastar Kanker Chhattisgarh.

4. Ramavatar Sharma, S/o Late Mr. Shiv Kumar Sharma, Aged About 41 Years, Post Lecturer ( Local Body ), Posted At- Government Higher Secondary School, Amoda, Block Narharpur, District Uttar Bastar Kanker Chhattisgarh.

5. Mrs. Shalini Shukla, W/o Mr. Rajesh Kumar Shukla, Aged About 47 Years, Post Lecturer ( Local Body ), Posted At- Government Higher Secondary School, Lakhanpur, Block Charama, District Uttar Bastar Kanker Chhattisgarh.

---- Petitioners

Versus

1. State Of Chhattisgarh, Through The Secretary, Education Department, Mantralaya, Naya Raipur District Raipur Chhattisgarh.

2. Secretary, Panchayat And Rural Development Department, Mantralaya, Naya Raipur District - Raipur Chhattisgarh.

3. Commissioner Cum Director, Panchayat Sanchnalaya, Naya Raipur - District Raipur Chhattisgarh.

4. Chief Executive Officer, Jila Panchayat, District Uttar Baster Kanker Chhattisgarh.

---- Respondents For Petitioner :

Shri Parag Kotecha, Advocate For Respondents/ State :

Shri Sudhir Sahu, Panel Lawyer Hon'ble Shri Justice Goutam Bhaduri

Order On Board 05/11/2019

1. Heard.

2. The limited grievance which the petitioner has raised in the present writ petition by virtue of order passed by this Court in the case of Mukesh Kumar Patel Vs. State of Chhattisgarh, WPS No. 2530/2017 decided on 26.11.2017 have been granted benefit of revised pay scale on completion of 8 years of service.

3. The counsel for the petitioners submits that the grievance which now remains is that the benefit is being provided to the petitioner prospectively and though the respondents have made a calculation which the petitioner is entitled for from the date of his completion of 8 years of service but no effective orders have been passed nor have department taken any steps for release of the arrears of payment. The petitioner prays for appropriate direction to the respondents for releasing the said amount.

4. Without entering into the merits of the case and taking into consideration the judgment of this Court in the case of Mukesh Patel (Supra) which has also been affirmed by the Division Bench and taking note of the fact that respondents have complied with the order to the extent of granting revised pay scale to the petitioner, let respondents No. 2 & 3 take an appropriate decision at the earliest so far as release of the arrears of payment which the petitioner is entitled for. Expecting a decision from the respondents within a period of 90 days from the date of receipt of copy of this order the present writ petition stands disposed off.

Sd/- Goutam Bhaduri Judge Jyoti