Chattisgarh High Court
Surendra Kumar Dewangan vs State Of Chhattisgarh on 13 October, 2022
-1-
NAFR
HIGH COURT of CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR
WPS No. 6464 of 2022
Surendra Kumar Dewangan S/o Shri Sant Ram Dewangan Aged
About 45 Years Presently Working As Lecturer (L.B.) At Govt. Higher
Secondary School Kanjheta, Block Pandariya, District Kabirdham
(C.G.)
---- Petitioner
Versus
1. State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Secretary, Department Of
Panchayat And Rural Development, Mantralaya Mahanadi Bhawan,
Atal Nagar, Nava Raipur, District Raipur (C.G.)
2. The Secretary Department Of Education, Mantralaya Mahanadi
Bhawan, Atal Nagar, Nava Raipur, District Raipur (C.G.)
3. Commissioner-Cum-Director Directorate Of Panchayat, Atal Nagar
Raipur District Raipur (C.G.)
4. Chief Executive Officer Zila Panchayat, Kabirdham, District
Kabirdham (C.G.)
5. District Education Officer Kabirdham, District Kabirdham (C.G.)
---- Respondents
______________________________________________________________
For Petitioner : Mr. CJK Rao, Advocate
For State : Mr. Akash Pandey, Panel Lawyer
S.B.: Hon'ble Shri Parth Prateem Sahu, Judge
Order On Board
13/10/2022
Heard.
1. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner
was appointed as Sikshakarmi Grade-III on 02.08.2008.
Thereafter, petitioner participated in the recruitment process and
he was appointed as Shikshakarmi Grade-I vide order dated
18.06.2010. Pursuant to order issued by the State Govt. with
respect to grant of pay-scale to the Panchayat Teachers at par
with the Teachers of the State Govt., after completion of 8 years
of service, the benefit was extended to the petitioner. However,
the arrears of revised pay scale with respect to the period from
02.08.2016 to 15.11.2016 has not been extended to the
petitioner. Learned counsel for the petitioner contended that the
similar issue has been considered and decided by a Coordinate
Bench of this Court in the case of Avinesh Kumar Namdev
and Ors. Vs. State of Chhattisgarh and Ors. (WPS No.5328
of 2021) and case of the petitioner is squarely covered with the
said judgment. He also submits that the petitioner has already
submitted representation before respondent No.4 which is
pending consideration since 2019. At this stage, grievance of the
petitioner would be redressed if a direction is issued to
respondent No.4 to consider and decide the representation
submitted by the petitioner with respect to grant of revised pay
scale from 02.08.2016 as also arrears of revised pay scale for
the intervening period.
2. Learned counsel for the State submits that in view of submission
of learned counsel for the petitioner that his representation be
considered and decided by respondent No.4 at the earliest, he is
having no objection.
3. The petitioner has placed on record order dated 15.11.2016
(Annexure P-2) wherein, it is ordered for calculating period of
service from the date of joining, appointment to the next higher
post and not with effect from 02/08/2016 and pay fixation at par
with the Teacher of State Govt. Submission of learned counsel
for the petitioner is that he was not given benefit of revised pay
scale with respect of the period from 02.08.2016 to 15.11.2016
erroneously.
4. In view of submission of learned counsel for the petitioner,
respondent No.4 is directed to consider and decide pending
representation dated 19.2.2019 at the earliest, preferably within
a period of 6 weeks from the date of receipt of copy of this order
in accordance with law, subject to verification of the facts,
keeping in mind the decision rendered in the case of Avinesh
Kumar Namdev (supra).
5. It is made clear that this Court has not expressed any opinion on
the merits of claim of the petitioner and it will be for respondent
No.4 to consider and decide his representation on its own
merits.
6. With the aforementioned observation and direction, the writ
petition stands disposed of.
7. Certified copy as per rules.
Sd/-------/--/-
(Parth Prateem Sahu)
Judge
Praveen
