Smt. Jyoti Dhruw v. State Of Chhattisgarh

NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR WPS No. 10471 of 2019 • Smt. Jyoti Dhruw W/o Jaleshwar Prasad Dhruw Aged About 34 Years Presently Working As Assistant Teacher (L.B.) At Government Higher Secondary School, Manohar, Block Simga, District Balodabazar-Bhatapara, Chhattisgarh ---- Petitioner

Versus

1. State of Chhattisgarh Through The Secretary, Education Department, Mantralaya, Mahanadi Bhawan, Atal Nagar Raipur, District Raipur, Chhattisgarh

2. The Secretary Department Of Panchayat And Rural Development, Mantralaya, Mahanadi Bhawan, Atal Nagar Raipur, District Raipur, Chhattisgarh

3. District Education Officer Balodabazar, District Balodabazar-Bhatapara, Chhattisgarh

4. Chief Executive Officer Zila Panchayat, Balodabazar, District BalodabazarBhatapara, Chhattisgarh

5. Block Education Officer Block Simga, District Balodabazar-Bhatapara, Chhattisgarh ---- Respondents For Petitioner :

Shri CJK Rao, Advocate For Respondents/State :

Ms. Binu Sharma, PL Hon'ble Shri Justice Goutam Bhaduri Order On Board 11/12/2019

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.8363 of 2018 and other connected matter, therefore, the same order

may be passed in the present writ petition also.

3. This Court in WPS No.8363 of 2018 on 02.01.2019 has passed the following order:- "2. The limited grievance of the petitioners is that they are entitled for the benefit of Kramonnati on completing 10 years of service which they have completed but they have not been given the same till date.

3. Given the limited grievance raised, let both the petitioners make detailed representation in this regard to respondents 3 & 4 who in turn shall scrutinize the same and pass a suitable order in accordance with the rules governing the field of Kramonnati. It is expected that an appropriate order shall be passed within a period of 4 months from the date of receipt of representation of the petitioners.

4. With the aforesaid observation, both the writ petitions stand disposed of."

4. Learned State counsel do not dispute the fact brought to the notice of the Court by the petitioner.

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