Chattisgarh High Court
Smt. Rashmi Sheolikar vs State Of Chhattisgarh on 10 March, 2022
1
NAFR
HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR
WPS No. 1611 of 2022
1. Smt. Rashmi Sheolikar W/o Shri Late Shri Ashvini Kumar Sheolikar, Aged
About 38 Years Occupation- Asi (M), Place Of Posting- 3rd Bn Caf
Amleshwar- Durg Chhattisgarh., District : Durg, Chhattisgarh
2. Vinod Kumar Vishwakarma, S/o Shri Janki Ram Vishwakarma, Aged About
41 Years Occupation- Asi (M), Place Of Posting- 3rd Bn Caf Amleshwar
Durg Chhattisgarh, District : Durg, Chhattisgarh
3. Vinod Kumar Sharma, S/o Late Shri Ramsharan Sharma, Aged About 39
Years Occupation Asi (M), Place Of Posting- 3rd Bn Caf Amleshwar Durg
Chhattisgarh., District : Durg, Chhattisgarh
4. Vijay Prakash Barle, S/o Shri Pukram Barle, Aged About 35 Years
Occupation Asi (M), Place Of Posting- 3rd Bn Caf Amleshwar- Durg
Chhattisgarh., District : Durg, Chhattisgarh
5. Smt. Hema Xess W/o Vinod Xess, Aged About 43 Years Occupation Asi
(M), Place Of Posting- 3rd Bn Caf Amleshwar Durg Chhattisgarh, District :
Durg, Chhattisgarh
---- Petitioners
Versus
1. State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Secretary, Home Affairs, Police
Department, Mahanadi Bhawan, Mantralaya, Atal Nagar, District Raipur
Chhattisgarh, District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh
2. State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Secretary, Finance Department,
Mahanadi Bhawan, Atal Nagar, Mantralaya, District Raipur Chhattisgarh,
District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh
3. The Director General Of Police, Police Head Quarters, Atal Nagar, District
Raipur Chhattisgarh, District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh
---- Respondents
For Petitioners : Mr. Shayon Kar, on behalf of
Mr. Prakash Tiwari, Advocate
For State : Mr. Ali Asgar, Dy. AG
Hon'ble Shri Justice P. Sam Koshy
Order on Board
10/03/2022
1. Grievance of the Petitioners is that, the Petitioners No.1 to 5 are
working as Assistant Sub Inspector (M) under the Respondents is
being denied the grant of ad-hoc pay increase which has been
granted to other similarly placed persons but who were not in
Ministerial cadre.
2. Counsel for the Petitioners submits that the grievance involved in the
present writ petition has already been adjudicated upon in favour of
the other similarly placed persons in Writ Petition (S) No. 4563 of
2006 [Abdul Nawab Khan & Others v. The State of Chhattisgarh &
Others], decided on 7.5.2009. The judgment passed by this Court in
Writ Petition (S) No. 4563 of 2006 has been affirmed even up till the
stage of Supreme Court. Subsequently, another batch of petitioners
filed a writ petition i.e., Writ Petition No. 4523 of 2014 [Francis Xavier
Back & Others v. State of Chhattisgarh & Others], and the said writ
petition also got disposed on 3.7.2015, granting the benefit which has
been extended to the other similarly placed persons in the light of the
decision rendered in the case of Abdul Nawab Khan (supra). Counsel
for the Petitioners therefore prays that the Respondents may further
be directed to consider the case of the Petitioners also in similar line.
3. Counsel for the State does not oppose the same.
4. Accordingly, the present writ petition is also disposed of in similar line
as in the case of Francis Xavier Back & Others v. State of
Chhattisgarh, decided on 3.7.2015 in Writ Petition (S) No. 4523 of
2014.
5. In case subject to verification, if the Petitioners are found eligible, the
relief as sought for may be released to them forthwith and if
Respondents find that the Petitioners are not entitled, they may be
suitably intimated in this regard giving reasons for their non
entitlement.
6. Let this exercise be done within a period of 90 days from the date of
the Petitioners presenting the certified copy of this order before the
respondent authorities.
7. With the aforesaid directions, the writ petition finally stands disposed
of.
Sd/-
(P. Sam Koshy)
Judge
Rohit
