Esther Masih v. State Of Chhattisgarh

NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR WPS No. 9482 of 2019

1. Esther Masih W/o Avinash Robinson, Aged About 43 Years Working As Lecturer L. (L.B.) And Posted At Govt. High School Dapka, Block Khairagarh, District Rajnandgaon Chhattisgarh

2. Poonam Choure, D/o R.D. Choure, Aged About 37 Years Working As Lecturer L. (L.B.) And Posted At Govt. Higher Secondary School Mudhipar, Block Khairagarh, District Rajnandgaon Chhattisgarh

3. Krishna Kumar Verma S/o Ratan Lal Verma, Aged About 49 Years Working As Lecturer L.(L.B.) And Posted At Govt. Higher Secondary School Mudhipar, Block Khairagarh, District Rajnandgaon Chhattisgarh

4. Vighnaharan Singh Bais S/o Manharan Singh Bais, Aged About 45 Years Working As Lecturer L.(L.B.) And Posted At Govt. Higher Secondary School Mudhipar, Block Khairagarh, District Rajnandgaon Chhattisgarh

5. Virendra Kumar Rangari, S/o Bhadru Rangari, Aged About 42 Years Working As Lecturer L.(L.B.) And Posted At Govt. Higher Secondary School Tappa, Block Dogargarh, District Rajnandgaon Chhattisgarh ---- Petitioners

Versus

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

2. Director, Public Instruction Raipur District Raipur Chhattisgarh

3. District Education Officer, Rajnandgaon, District Rajnandgaon Chhattisgarh ---- Respondents For Petitioner :

Shri Ajay Shrivastava, Advocate For Respondents/State :

Shri Soumya Rai, PL Hon'ble Shri Justice Goutam Bhaduri Order On Board 20/11/2019

1. The limited prayer which the petitioners have sought in this writ petition is for a direction to respondent no.1 to take a decision on the claim of the petitioners for grant of two advance increments on their obtaining B.Ed./D.Ed. Certificate both prior to appointment as well as subsequent to the appointment which is being otherwise provided to the Govt. teachers.

2. The claim of the petitioners is based on the fact that the nature of duties discharged by them as Shiksha Karmi are identical and similar to the government teachers and their services have also now got merged with the Education Department. Therefore, the benefits which are being extended to the government teachers should also be extended to the petitioners.

3. Given the nature of dispute and also the fact that the claim of the petitioners would require a policy decision on the part of the State Govt., this court does not intend to keep the petition pending any further, rather ends of justice would meet if the petition is disposed of with a direction to respondents 1 & 2 to take a decision in this regard as to whether the petitioners would also be entitled for similar benefits as are being granted to the regular government teachers. It is ordered accordingly. Let this exercise be concluded within a period of 4 months from the date of receipt of certified copy of this order. It shall be the responsibility of the petitioners to bring the order of this Court to the notice of respondents 1 & 2 along with any fresh representation, if they so prefer.

4. It is made clear that this Court has not expressed anything on merits of the case so far as the entitlement of the petitioners are concerned. The Respondents shall be at liberty to take a decision independently. Sd/- Goutam Bhaduri Judge Ashu