Chattisgarh High Court
Smt. Ruma Mishra vs State Of Chhattisgarh on 2 May, 2025
1
2025:CGHC:20114
NAFR
HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR
WPS No. 3071 of 2025
1 - Smt. Ruma Mishra W/o Rajesh Mishra Aged About 58 Years R/o Mig-
Digitally
signed by
SHOAIB
58 Nehru Nagar Bilaspur District - Bilaspur (C.G.)
SHOAIB ANWAR
ANWAR Date:
... Petitioner(s)
2025.05.03
17:26:21
+0530
versus
1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Secretary School Education
Department Mahanadi Bhawan Mantralaya Atal Nagar Nawa Raipur
(C.G.)
2 - The Secretary Government Of Chhattisgarh Panchayat And Rural
Development Department Mahanadi Bhawan Mantralaya Atal Nagar
Nawa Raipur (C.G.)
3 - The District Education Officer Bilaspur District - Bilaspur (C.G.)
4 - The Chief Executive Officer Zila Panchayat Bilaspur District - Bilaspur
(C.G.)
... Respondent(s)
(Cause title taken from CIS)
For Petitioner(s) : Shri Kamlesh Kumar Pandey, Advocate.
For Respondent(s) : Shri Vinay Pandey, Dy. Advocate General
Hon'ble Shri Bibhu Datta Guru, Judge
Order on Board
02.05.2025
1. By the present writ petition, the petitioner is seeking direction
towards the respondent authorities for grant of Kramonnati
Vetanman on completion of 10 years of service in view of the order
dated 28.02.2024 passed by the Division Bench of this High Court
in WA No. 261/2023 and also as per circular dated 10.03.2017
issued by the State Government of C.G.
2. The claim of the petitioner is with regard to grant of Kramonnati
Vetanman. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that with
regard to award of Kramonnati Vetanman, some circular has also
been issued by the respondent-State. Apart from this, Division
Bench of this Court in case of Smt. Sona Sahu vs. State of
Chhattisgarh and others in W.A. No. 261 of 2023, has also
considered the identical issue. The petitioner is also entitled for
Kramonnati Vetanman. He further submits that at present, this
petition may be disposed of with liberty to the petitioner to make a
representation to the competent authority in light of order dated
28/02/2024 passed by this Court in W.A. No.261 of 2023.
3. Learned State counsel opposes the submissions made by learned
counsel for the petitioner.
4. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the
pleadings and the documents.
5. Against the order passed in WA No. 261 of 2023, the State
preferred a review petition bearing REVP No. 147 of 2024, which
was considered and rejected by a detailed order. There against the
State filed an SLP before the Supreme Court bearing SLP (C) No.
58525 of 2024, which was dismissed by order dated 17.03.2025.
6. Be that as it may, looking to the limited prayer made by learned
counsel for the petitioner, this petition at this stage is disposed of
permitting the petitioner to make representation raising all grounds
as raised in this writ petition to competent authority annexing all
relevant documents and judgment of this Court passed in W.A. No.
261 of 2023. On such representation being made, it is expected that
the competent authority shall consider the same in accordance with
law considering the circular(s) issued in this regard, in light of
judgment of this Court in W.A. No.261 of 2023 within further period
of 4 months from the date of receipt of such representation. It is
made clear that this Court has not expressed any opinion on merits
of this case, it is for the competent authority to consider the claim of
petitioner on its own merits.
7. With the aforesaid observation, the writ petition is disposed of.
Sd/-
(Bibhu Datta Guru)
Judge
Shoaib
