Ashok Kumar Satnami v. State Of Chhattisgarh

NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR WRIT PETITION (S) NO.7381 OF 2018

1. Ashok Kumar Satnami S/o Shri Subedar Ram Satnami Aged About 44 Years R/o Near Jute Mile Raigarh, District- Raigarh, Chhattisgarh.

...Petitioner(s)

Versus

1. State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Secretary, School Education Department, Mahanadi Bhawan, New Mantralay, Raipur District- Raipur, Chhattisgarh.

2. Director School Education Department, Indrawati Bhawan, District Raipur, Chhattisgarh.

3. The District Education Officer Raigarh District- Raigarh, Chhattisgarh.

4. The Block Education Officer Pusaur, Raigarh District- Raigarh, Chhattisgarh.

... Respondent(s) For Petitioner :

Shri Vineet Pandey,Advocate.

For Respondent-State :

Shri DK Wankhede, Govt. Advocate.

Hon'ble Shri Justice P. Sam Koshy Order on Board 12.11.2018 1.

The grievance raised by the petitioner is non granting of two advance increments on obtaining D.Ed. Examination certificate. 2.

The petitioner submits that the claim of the petitioner had already been decided in couple of writ petitions decided by this court. He further submits that the present petitioner had already filed a writ petition vide WPS No.5686 of 2008 which got disposed of on 15.10.2008 directing the respondents to take a decision on the representation made by the petitioner.

3.

According to the petitioner, though he has made a representation and his representation has been forwarded at all levels to the higher authorities in the department, but no final order has been passed.

4.

Given the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case, the State counsel also is of the opinion that let the respondents No.2&3 take an appropriate decision in the case of the petitioner in accordance with rules.

5.

Accordingly, the present petition stands disposed of with a direction to the respondents No.2&3 to take a decision on the claim of the petitioner so far as grant of two annual increments on obtaining D.Ed. Examination certificate on his own cost is concerned. While taking decision, the respondents would take into consideration the correspondence made by the State Govt. in this regard on 25.03.2017 (Annexure P/7) as also the correspondence made by the District Education Officer on 28.07.2018 (Annexure P/6). Let this exercise be concluded within a period of four months from the date of receipt of certified copy of this order.

6.

In addition, the petitioner would also be entitled to file a fresh representation duly supported with all necessary documents and circulars of the State Govt. as also the judgment of this High Court as well as other High Courts in this regard.

7.

Accordingly, the petition stands disposed of. Sd/- (P. Sam Koshy) Judge inder