Phanendra Kumar Jaiswal v. State Of Chhattisgarh

NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR WPS No. 10210 of 2019 1.

Phanendra Kumar Jaiswal S/o Late S. P. Jaiswal Aged About 55 Years Working As Lecturer E.(L.B.) And Posted At Government Higher Secondary School Sutiurkuli, Block Bilaigarh, District : Balodabazar-Bhathapara, Chhattisgarh 2.

Ku. Bhawna Dewangan D/o Parmanand Dewangan Aged About 36 Years Working As Lecturer E. (L.B.) And Posted At Government Higher Secondary School Gopalpuri, Block Dhamtari, District : Dhamtari, Chhattisgarh 3.

Smt. Sangeeta Pathak W/o Harishankar Pathak Aged About 52 Years Working As Lecturer E. (L.B.) And Posted At Government Higher Secondary School Gopalpuri, Block Dhamtari, District : Dhamtari, Chhattisgarh 4.

Smt. Somlata Dewangan W/o Rohit Kumar Dewangan, Aged About 41 Years Working As Lecturer E. (L.B.) And Posted At Government Girls Higher Secondary School Palari , Block Gurur, District : Balod, Chhattisgarh ---- Petitioners

Versus

1.

State of Chhattisgarh Through Secretary, Department Of Panchayat Mahanadi Bhawan, Mantralaya New Raipur, District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh 2.

Secretary, Department of School Education Mahanadi Bhawan, Mantralaya New Raipur, District Raipur Chhattisgarh 3.

Director, Directorate Of Chhattisgarh Public Instruction, Atal Nagar, Raipur, District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh 4.

District Education Officer, Baloda Bazar District Baloda Bazar Bhatapara Chhattisgarh 5.

District Education Officer, Dhamtari District - Dhamtari Chhattisgarh 6.

District Education Officer, Balod District Balod Chhattisgarh 7.

Block Education Officer, Block Bilaigarh District Baloda Bazar Bhatapara Chhattisgarh 8.

Block Education Officer, Dhamtari District Dhamtari Chhattisgarh 9.

Block Education Officer, Gurur District Balod Chhattisgarh --- Respondents For Petitioner :

Mr. U.P. S. Sahu, Advocate For Respondent/State :

Mr. Kapil Maini,PL

Hon'ble Shri Justice Goutam Bhaduri Order On Board 05/12/2019

1. Heard.

2. Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the issue involved in the present writ petition has already been considered and decided by this Court in WPS No.8998 of 2019, therefore, the same order may be passed in the present writ petition also.

3. This Court in WPS No.8998 of 2019 on 05.11.2019 has passed the following order:- "1.The limited prayer which the petitioner has 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 petitioner is based on the fact that the nature of duties discharged by them as Shiksha Karmis 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 petitioner.

3.

Given the nature of dispute and also the fact that the claim of the petitioner 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 petitioner 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 petitioner 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."

4. Learned State counsel has no objection.

5. It is ordered accordingly. The ratio laid down in the case supra shall also govern the cause of lis in this case and will have the same effect and operation.

6. With such observation, the writ petition stands disposed of. Sd/- Goutam Bhaduri Judge yasmin