Smt. Hiramani Kujur vs State Of Chhattisgarh
2022 Latest Caselaw 3137 Chatt

                                          1


                                                                                N/AFR
                HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR
                     WRIT PETITION (S) NO. 3141 OF 2022
1.      Smt. Hiramani Kujur, W/o Shri Anthres Kujur, aged about 45 years, working
as Lecturer (L.B.), Govt. High School Saraitola, Block - Pathalgaon, District
Jashpur (C.G.)                                                          ... Petitioner
                                        versus
1.      State of Chhattisgarh, through: Secretary, Department of School
Education, Mantralaya, Mahanadi Bhawan, Atal Nagar, New Raipur, District :
Raipur (C.G.)
2.      Secretary, Department of Panchayat and Rural Development, Mantralaya,
Mahanadi Bhawa, Atal Nagar, Naya Raipur, District: Raipur (C.G.)
3.      National Middle School Mission, through its Managing Director, Second
Floor, Integrated Education Building, Pension Bada, Raipur, District Raipur (C.G.)
4.      Commissioner-cum-Director, Directorate of Panchayat, Atal Nagar, Naya
Raipur, District: Raipur (C.G.)
5.      Chief Executive Officer, Jila Panchayat, Jashpur, District Jashpur (CG)
6.      District Education Officer, Jashpur, District Jashpur (CG) ... Respondents

       For Petitioner              :      Mr. Manoj Chouhan, Advocate.
       For Respondents/State       :      Mr. Avinash Singh, Panel Lawyer.
                         Hon'ble Shri Justice P. Sam Koshy
                                  Order on Board
                                    [29/04/2022]

1. The limited grievance which the Petitioner has raised in the present Writ

Petition, by virtue of 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, is for grant of benefit of revised pay scale on completion

of 8 years of service.

2. Learned Counsel for Petitioner submits that the grievance which now

remains is that the benefit is being provided to Petitioner prospectively. Though

Respondents have made a calculation which Petitioner was entitled for from the

date of completion of 8 years of service but no effective orders have been passed

nor has the Department taken any step for releasing the arrears of payment.

Petitioner therefore prays for appropriate direction to Respondents for releasing

the said amount.

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

the judgment of this Court rendered 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 Petitioner, let Respondents No.2 to 4 take appropriate decision at the

earliest so far as release of arrears of payment which the Petitioner is entitled for.

4. Petitioner is also directed to furnish a representation before the said

Authorities as well. It is expected from the Authorities concerned that they shall

take a decision in this regard within a period of 90 days from the date of receipt of

copy of this Order and/or from the date of receipt of the representation of the

Petitioner.

5. With aforesaid direction/observation, the Writ Petition stands disposed of.

Sd/-

                                                                            (P. Sam Koshy)
/sharad/                                                                        JUDGE