← Library
High Court Of ChhattisgarhWPS/8003/2018disposed off

Prasanna Kumar Sahu v. State Of Chhattisgarh

2018-12-05Hon'Ble Shri Justice P. Sam Koshy2 pages

NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR WPS No. 8003 of 2018 Prasanna Kumar Sahu S/o Sugreev Sahu, Aged About 46 Years Working As Peon, Govt. Higher Secondary School, Saraipali, Block Tamnar, District Raigarh Chhattisgarh, District : Raigarh, Chhattisgarh ---- Petitioner

Versus

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

2. The District Education Officer, Raigarh, District Raigarh Chhattisgarh, District : Raigarh, Chhattisgarh

3. The Block Education Officer, Tamnar, District Raigarh Chhattisgarh, District : Raigarh, Chhattisgarh ---- Respondents For petitioner :

Shri Ramankant Pandey, Advocate.

For State :

Ms. Sunita Jain,PL Hon'ble Shri Justice P. Sam Koshy Order on Board 05/12/2018 This writ petition has been filed by the petitioner seeking benefits of regular pay scale as has been granted to the similarly placed employees in the department.

2.

Heard learned counsel for the parties.

3.

Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner wants to file fresh representation for grant of regular pay scale before the committee constituted by the State Government vide order dated 09.07.2012 for redressal of grievances of employees with regard to grant of regular pay scale from their initial date of appointment.

4.

The petitioner is directed to approach before the Committee for appropriate relief and in turn, it is directed that the Committee shall consider and decide the

case, in accordance with law and on its own merits. The needful may be done within a period of 12 weeks from the date of receipt of copy of this order. 5.

Needless to mention that this Court has not expressed any opinion on the merits of the case, so far as the entitlement of the petitioner is concerned. The respondents are at liberty to decide the same after comparing his claim with the persons against whom the petitioner is claiming parity. 6.

The Writ Petition is disposed of accordingly. Sd/- (P. Sam Koshy) Rohit JUDGE