High Court Of ChhattisgarhWPS/7436/2018allowed

Randheer Kumar v. State Of Chhattisgarh

2018-11-14Hon'Ble Shri Justice P. Sam Koshy2 pages

NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR Writ Petition (S) No. 7436 of 2018 • Randheer Kumar S/o Jagat Ram, aged about 37 years, working as Lecturer Panchayat, Nagriya Nikay, Govt. Hr. Sec. School, Kumhari, Block Dhamdha, District Durg (C.G.) ---- Petitioner

Versus

1. State of Chhattisgarh through Secretary, Department of Panchayat and Rural Development, Mahanadi Bhawan, Naya Raipur (C.G.)

2. Commissioner-cum-Director, Directorate of Panchayat, Naya Raipur, District Raipur (C.G.)

3. Chief Executive Officer, Jila Panchayat Raipur, District Raipur (C.G.)

4. Chief Municipal Officer, Nagar Palika Parishad, Kumhari, District Durg (C.G.) ---- Respondents For Petitioner : Shri Harish Khuntiya, Advocate For Respondents/State : Shri Dhiraj Wankhede, Govt. Advocate Hon'ble Shri Justice P. Sam Koshy Order on Board 14.11.2018 1.

The dispute raised in the present writ petition is the non-consideration of the case of the petitioner for grant of revised pay scale on completion of 8 years of service. The denial to the petitioner was that the petitioner has not completed 8 years of service under the same employer. 2.

The grievance of the petitioner was that the petitioner was initially appointed as Shiksha Karmi Grade-III by Janpad Panchayat Raipur and subsequently applied for recruitment on the higher post under Jila Panchayat Raipur in the year 2011 and taking both the services, the petitioner has completed more that 8 years of service and therefore he is entitled for the benefit of higher pay scale.

The counsel for the petitioner submits that the issue involved in the

present writ petition is squarely covered by the judgment of this Court in a bunch of writ petitions disposed off on 27.10.2018. The lead case of which being W.P.(S) No. 6147 of 2018 (Shabnum Khatun vs. State of Chhattisgarh & Ors.) 4.

This aspect is not disputed by the State counsel so far as the matter being similar to the one of "Shabnum Khatun" (supra). 5.

Given the facts and circumstances of the case the present writ petition also deserves to be and is accordingly disposed off in similar terms to the order passed in W.P.(S) No. 6147 of 2018 (Shabnum Khatun vs. State of Chhattisgarh & Ors.) 6.

The writ petition accordingly stands allowed. The petitioner would be entitled for the benefit as prayed for subject to the verification of the case by the Department.

Sd/- (P. Sam Koshy) Judge vatti