Chattisgarh High Court
Rajesh Kumar Pandey vs State Of Chhattisgarh on 13 July, 2021
-1-
NAFR
HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR
WWPS No. 3551 of 2021
1. Rajesh Kumar Pandey S/o Shri Vidya Prasad Pandey Aged About 47
Years Lecturer (L.B.), Govt. Higher Secondary School, Kishungarh, Block
Pandariya, District Kabirdham (Chhattisgarh)
---- Petitioner
Versus
1. State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Secretary, Department Of Panchayat
And Rural Development, Mantralaya, Mahanadi Bhawan, Atal Nagar, Nava
Raipur, District Raipur (Chhattisgarh)
2. The Secretary Department Of Education, Mantralaya, Mahanadi Bhawan,
Atal Nagar, Nava Raipur, District Raipur (Chhattisgarh)
3. Commissioner-Cum-Director Directorate Of Panchayat, Atal Nagar Raipur,
District Raipur (Chhattisgarh),
4. Chief Executive Officer Zila Panchayat, Kabirdham, District Kabirdham
(Chhattisgarh),
5. District Education Officer Kabirdham, District Kabirdham (Chhattisgarh)
---- Respondents
For Petitioner : Shri C.J. K. Rao, Advocate.
For State : Shri Jitendra Pali, Dy. A.G.
Hon'ble Shri Justice P. Sam Koshy
Order on Board
13.07.2021 .
1. The grievance of the petitioner is that the petitioner was initially appointed
on the post of Shiksha Karmi Grade-II on 29.04.2005. Subsequently, he
joined on the post of Shiksha Karmi Grade-I on 18.06.2010 and therefore,
after completion of 8 years of service on 29.04.2013 from the initial
appointment, he was entitled to receive the revised pay-scale, however,
the same has been granted from 02.02.2018.
2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that similarly situated persons
have filed WPS No.95 of 2019 and WPS No.99 of 2019 for grant of arrears
of pay-scales wherein this Court has passed the following order :
"2. The limited grievance which the petitioner has raised in this
writ petition by virtue of order passed by this Court in the
case of Mukesh Kumar Patel Vs. State of Chhattisgarh,
WPS No. 2530/2017 decided on 26.11.2017 has been
granted benefit of revised pay scale on completion of 8 years
of service.
3. 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 for
from the date of his completion of 8 years of service but no
effective orders have been passed nor have department
taken any steps for release of the arrears of payment. The
petitioner prays for appropriate direction to the respondents
for releasing the said amount.
4. Without entering into the merits of the case and taking into
consideration the judgment of this Court in the case of
Mukesh Patel (Supra) which has also been affirmed by the
Division Bench and 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 respondents 2
& 3 take an appropriate decision at the earliest so far as
release of the arrears of payment which the petitioners are
entitled for. Excepting a decision from the respondents within
a period of 90 days from the date of receipt of copy of this
order, the present writ petition stands disposed off."
3. Learned State Counsel do not dispute the fact that the similar issue raised
in this case has been decided by this Court in W.P(S) No.95 of 2019 &
WPS No.99 of 2019.
4. The order passed in WPS No. 95 of 2019 and WPS No.99 of 2019 (supra)
shall also be applicable to the case of present writ petition. It is directed
that respondents 3 & 5 shall take appropriate decision at the earliest for
releasing the arrears of payment which the petitioner is entitled for. It is
expected that a decision shall be taken within a period of 90 days from the
date of receipt of this order.
5. With the above observations, this writ petition stands finally disposed of.
Sd/-
(P. Sam Koshy)
Judge
Jyotijha
