Chattisgarh High Court
Paramjeet Kaur Khanuja vs State Of Chhattisgarh on 6 May, 2025
1
2025:CGHC:20614
NAFR
HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR
WPS No. 3158 of 2025
1 - Paramjeet Kaur Khanuja W/o Shri Sukhdeep Singh Aged About 44
Years Posted As Lecturer (Lb), Swani Karpatri Ji Government Higher
Digitally
signed by
SHOAIB
SHOAIB ANWAR
ANWAR Date:
Secondary School Kawardha, District- Kabirdham (C.G.)
2025.05.07
16:18:30
+0530
... Petitioner(s)
versus
1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through Its Secretary, School Education
Department, Mantralaya, Bhawan, Naya Raipur, District- Raipur (C.G.)
2 - Secretary Urban Administration And Development Department,
Mantralaya, Naya Raipur District- Raipur (C.G.)
3 - Director Directorate Of Public Instruction Block-C, Indrawati Bhawan
Atal Nagar, Raipur, District- Raipur (C.G.)
4 - District Education Officer District- Kabirdham (C.G.)
5 - Chief Municipal Officer Municipal Council Kawardha District-
Kabirdham (C.G.)
2
... Respondent(s)
(Cause title taken from CIS)
For Petitioner(s) : Ms. Diksha Gouraha, Advocate.
For Respondent(s) : Ms. Akanksha Verma, Panel Lawyer.
Hon'ble Shri Bibhu Datta Guru, Judge
Order on Board
06.05.2025
1. The grievance of the petitioner in the instant case in the writ petition
is non acceptance of the past services rendered by the petitioner as
Lecturer (Panchayat) by the respondents for the purpose of
absorption in the Education Department.
2. The case of the petitioner is that initially the petitioner was
appointed in the Panchayat Department as Shiksha Karmi Grade -
II in the year 2007. Subsequently in another recruitment process
petitioner again got selected as Lecturer (Panchayat) on
18.06.2010. The petitioner appeared in examination and cleared the
selection process of Lecturer (Nagriya Nikay) on 24.08.2011.
According to the petitioner for the purpose of grant of revised pay
scale on completion of 8 years of service, the department had
counted his past services that he had rendered under Panchayat
Department i.e. the appointment initially made in the year 2007.
3. Grievance of the petitioner now is that though the department has
accepted the past services of the petitioner for the purpose of
revised pay scale but for the purpose of the counting total length of
service for absorption in the Education Department the past
services is not being considered.
4. The reason which has been informed to the petitioner is that the
petitioner has not obtained NOC from the Panchayat Department
while applying for appointment in Nagri Nikay and another reason
for not considering was that there is change in the department of the
petitioner for the purpose of counting two services.
5. So far as the non obtaining of NOC is concerned, the said aspect
already stands decided by this Court in the case of Mukesh Patel
Vs. State of Chhattisgarh in WPS No. 2530/2017 decided on
28/11/2017 and so far as the change of department is concerned
that issue also stands decided by this Court in the case of
Shabnam Khatun Vs. State of Chhattisgarh in WPS No.
6147/2018 and other connected writ petitions decided on
27/10/2018.
6. Given the aforesaid facts and judgments decided by this Court no
strong reasons have been made out by the department as to why
the services rendered by the petitioner in the Panchayat
Department would not be acceptable for the purpose of counting his
total length of service so far as the claim for absorption is
concerned. Once when the department has already accepted the
past services for the purpose of revised pay scale there does not
seem to be any good reason for not applying the same analogy for
determining the issue of absorption.
7. Given the said facts and circumstances of the case, let petitioner's
case be scrutinized by the respondent No. 1 & 2 and an appropriate
order be passed deciding as to why the past services of the
petitioner cannot be counted for the purpose of absorption, when
the department itself has counted the said period for the purpose of
grant of revised pay scale.
8. Let appropriate order be passed by the respondent No. 1 & 2 within
a period of 90 days from the date of receipt of copy of this order
after thorough verification of the individual details of the petitioner. It
shall be the responsibility of the petitioner to apprise respondent No.
1 & 2 so far as order passed by this Court is concerned. The
petitioner would also be at liberty to file fresh representation if she
so desires.
9. With the aforesaid directions, the present writ petition stands
disposed of.
Sd/-
(Bibhu Datta Guru)
Judge
Shoaib
