Domendra Kumar Verma v. State Of Chhattisgarh

NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPS No. 8092 of 2018 Domendra Kumar Verma S/o Jagdish Prasad Verma, Aged About 36 Years, Working As Lecturer Panchayat, Govt. Higher Secondary School, Aoundhi, Block Patan, District Durg Chhattisgarh. ---Petitioner

Versus

1. State Of Chhattisgarh, Through Secretary, Department Of Panchayat And Rural Development, Mahanadi Bhawan, Naya Raipur Chhattisgarh.

2. Commissioner - Cum- Director, Directorate Of Panchayat, Naya Raipur, District Raipur, Chhattisgarh.

3. Chief Executive Officer, Jila Panchayat Raipur, District Raipur Chhattisgarh.

4. Chief Executive Officer, Jila Panchayat, Durg, District Durg, Chhattisgarh.

---Respondents For petitioner :

Shri Harish Khuntiya, Advocate.

For State :

Shri Syed Majid Ali, Dy.GA.

Hon'ble Shri Justice P. Sam Koshy Order on Board 07/12/2018 1.

The dispute raised in the present writ petition is the nonconsideration 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 under the Urban Administration Department and subsequently applied for recruitment on the higher post under the Panchayat Department in the year 2013 and taking both the services, the petitioner has completed

more than 8 years of service and therefore she is entitled for the benefit of higher pay scale.

3.

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 WPS No. 6147/2018 (Shabnum Khatun v. State of Chhattisgarh & Ors.) 4.

This aspect is not disputed by the State counsel so far as the matter being similar to the one passed in the case 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 WPS No. 6147/2018 (Shabnum Khatun v. 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) Sumit JUDGE