Smt. Chitralekha Paikra vs State Of Chhattisgarh
2021 Latest Caselaw 1102 Chatt

                                        1

                                                                             NAFR
             HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR

                       Writ Petition (S) No. 3526 of 2021

      Smt. Chitralekha Paikra W/o Sugansai Paikra, Aged About 38 Years
      Working As Lecturer (L.B.) Government High School, Kunmera, Block
      Sitapur, District Surguja, Chhattisgarh

                                                                      ---- Petitioner

                                     Versus

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

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

   3. Commissioner Cum Director, Directorate Of Panchayat, Atal Nagar,
      Naya Raipur, District Raipur, Chhattisgarh.

   4. Director, Public Instructions, Raipur, District Raipur, Chhattisgarh.

   5. Collector, Ambikapur, District Surguja, Chhattisgarh.

   6. Chief Executive Officer, Jila Panchayat, Ambikapur, District Surguja
      Chhattisgarh.

   7. District Education Officer, Ambikapur, District Surguja, Chhattisgarh.

                                                                 ---- Respondents

For Petitioner : Mr. Harish Khuntiya, Advocate For State : Mr. Suyash Dhar, P.L.

Hon'ble Shri Justice P. Sam Koshy Order On Board 13.07.2021

1. The limited grievance which the petitioner has raised in the present writ

petition is the benefits which arise, by virtue of the order passed by this

Court in the case of Mukesh Kumar Patel & another Vs. State of

Chhattisgarh & another, WPS No. 2530/2017 decided on 28.11.2017

as regards granting of the benefit of revised pay scale on completion

of 8 years of service.

2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the grievance which

now remains is that the benefit is being provided to the petitioner

prospectively and though the respondents have made a calculation

which the petitioner was entitled from the date of her completion of 8

years of service but no effective order has been passed nor the

department has taken any step for releasing the arrears of payment.

The petitioner prays for an appropriate direction to the respondents for

releasing the said amount.

3. Without entering into the merits of the case and taking into

consideration the judgment of this Court in the case of Mukesh Kumar

Patel (Supra) which has also been affirmed by the Division Bench and

also taking note of the fact that the respondents have complied with the

order to the extent of granting revised pay scale to the petitioner, let the

respondents 2 & 3 take an appropriate decision at the earliest as

regards releasing of the arrears of payment which the petitioner is

entitled for. Expecting a decision from the respondents within a period

of 90 days from the date of receipt of copy of this order, the writ petition

stands disposed of.

Sd/-

P. Sam Koshy Judge Khatai