Hemant Kumar Yadav v. State Of Chhattisgarh

-1NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPS No. 125 of 2019 1.

Hemant Kumar Yadav S/o Shri Krishan Kumar Yadav Aged About 60 Years Upper Division Teacher, Govt. Middle School Taroodu DistrictBalod, Chhattisgarh. 2.

Chhatar Singh Koma S/o Shri B. R. Koma Aged About 59 Years R/o Village And Post Chipra, Tahsil Doundi, District- Balod, Chhattisgarh. 3.

Yeram Dilliwar S/o Shri Hari Lal Dilliwar Aged About 59 Years Lecturer, Govt. Higher Secondary School, Balod, District- Balod, Chhattisgarh. 4.

Khetaha Ram Netam S/o Shri Parou Ram Netam Aged About 58 Years Head Master, Govt. Middle School Taraud, Block And District- Balod, Chhattisgarh.

5.

Gambhir Ram Thakur S/o Shri Bali Ram Thakur Aged About 61 Years R/o Village Jhalmala, Post- Admabad, Tahsil And District Balod, Chhattisgarh 6.

Janak Ram Patel S/o Shri Vishal Ram Patel Aged About 61 Years R/o Village And Post Sankara (J) Tahsil And District- Balod, Chhattisgarh. 7.

B. R. Bhuarya S/o Shri P. S. Bhuarya Aged About 60 Years R/o Village Aamapara, Balod, Tahsil And District- Balod, Chhattisgarh. 8.

Kaushal Ram Sahu S/o Shri Nohar Singh Sahu Aged About 61 Years R/o Village Dewarbhat, Post- Aadmabad, Balod, Tahsil And District- Balod, Chhattisgarh.

9.

Smt. Amrita Ramteke W/o Shri Ganesh Ramteke Aged About 60 Years R/o Village Budhapara Road, In front Of State Bank, Balod, Tahsil And District- Balod, Chhattisgarh.

10. Smt. Kaushaliya Thakur W/o Shri G. Thakur Aged About 58 Years Head Mistress, Government Primary School Shikaripara, Balod, District- Balod, Chhattisgarh.

---- Petitioners

Versus

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

2. District Education Officer Balod, District- Balod, Chhattisgarh.

3. Treasury Officer Treasury, Account And Pension, Balod, District- Balod, Chhattisgarh.

---Respondents For Petitioner :

Mr. Somkant Verma, Advocate For State :

Ms. Sunita Jain, G.A.

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

-210/01/2019

1. After arguing for sometimes, the counsel for the petitioners prays that the matter may be disposed of permitting the petitioners to make a fresh representation, in addition to the earlier representation, which they are made in respect of their claim for grant of regular payscale from the date of initial appointment.

2. The contention of the petitioners is that though the claim of the petitioners on an earlier occasion had been rejected by the department, but subsequently, the same department in other districts have granted the said benefits to other similarly placed persons, and therefore, according to the petitioners, the rejection of their earlier claim was not justified.

3. Without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, so far as their entitlement are concerned, the writ petition stands disposed of holding that subject to the petitioners' making a fresh representation within a period of 3 weeks from today supported with all relevant documents in respect of their claim, the respondent No.1 shall take a decision on the representation, so claimed by the petitioners at the earliest preferably within a period of 4 months from the date of receipt of the copy of this order. In case, if it is found that the petitioners are entitled for, then appropriate steps should be taken for implementation of the same at the earliest.

4. With the aforesaid observations, the writ petition stands disposed off. Sd/- (P. Sam Koshy) Judge Ved