[Cites 1, Cited by 0]
Chattisgarh High Court
Chameli Sahu vs State Of Chhattisgarh on 26 February, 2026
Author: Parth Prateem Sahu
Bench: Parth Prateem Sahu
1
2026:CGHC:10069
NAFR
HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR
WPS No. 2080 of 2026
1 - Chameli Sahu W/o Bhupendar Kumar Sahu Aged About 47 Years
Presently Posted As Head Master At Govt. Primary School Nayapara, Block-
Gariyaband, District- Gariyaband (C.G.)
2 - Bhavna Sharma W/o Vimal Sharma Aged About 51 Years Presently
Posted As Lecturer At Govt. Higher Secondary School Atarmara Block-
Chhura, District Gariyaband (C.G.)
3 - Rajesh Kumar Kashyap S/o Chowa Ram Kashyap Aged About 41 Years
Presently Posted As Lecturer At Govt. Higher Secondary School Atarmara
Block- Chhura, District Gariyaband (C.G.)
4 - Rajesh Kumar Kansari S/o Nammu Lal Kansari Aged About 52 Years
Presently Posted As Lecturer At Govt. Higher Secondary School Atarmara
Block- Chhura, District Gariyaband (C.G.)
5 - Uttam Kumar Kansari S/o Sohan Kansari Aged About 43 Years Presently
Posted As Lecturer At Govt. Higher Secondary School Atarmara Block-
BALRAM
PRASAD Chhura, District Gariyaband (C.G.)
DEWANGAN
Digitally signed
by BALRAM
PRASAD
DEWANGAN 6 - Mukesh Kumar Chandrakar S/o Shyam Lal Chandrakar Aged About 46
Years Presently Posted As Lecturer At Govt. Higher Secondary School
Atarmara Block- Chhura, District Gariyaband (C.G.)
7 - Santosh Kumar Nirmal S/o Johat Ram Nirmal Aged About 52 Years
Presently Posted As Lecturer At Govt. Higher Secondary School Atarmara
2
Block- Chhura, District Gariyaband (C.G.)
8 - Gajendra Kumat Nirmalkar S/o Santram Nirmalkar Aged About 43 Years
Presently Posted As Assistant Teacher At Govt. Higher Secondary School
Atarmara Block- Chhura, District Gariyaband (C.G.)
9 - Kuldeep Kumar Gilhare S/o Hriday Lal Gilhare Aged About 43 Years
Presently Posted As Lecturer At Govt. Higher Secondary School Atarmara
Block- Chhura, District Gariyaband (C.G.)
--- Petitioner(s)
versus
1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Secretary School Education
Department, Mantralaya Mahanadi Bhawan, Atal Nagar, Naya Raipur,
Revenue And Civil District Raipur (C.G.)
2 - The Secretary Panchayat And Rural Development, Government Of
Chhattisgarh, Mantralaya, Mahanadi Bhawan, Atal Nagar, Naya Raipur,
Revenue And Civil District- Raipur (C.G.)
3 - Director Directorate Of Public Instruction, Indrawati Bhawan, Atal Nagar,
Naya Raipur, District Raipur (C.G.)
4 - The Commissioner Cum Director Directorate Of Panchayat, Indravati
Bhawan, Atal Nagar, Naya Raipur, District Raipur (C.G.)
5 - The District Education Officer Gariyaband, District- Gariyaband (C.G.)
6 - The Block Education Officer Gariyaband, District Gariyaband (C.G.)
7 - The Block Education Officer Chhura, District Gariyaband (C.G.)
8 - The Chief Executive Officer Zila Panchayat Gariyaband, District
Gariyaband (C.G.)
9 - The Chief Executive Officer Janpad Panchayat Gariyaband, District
Gariyaband (C.G.)
3
10 - The Chief Executive Officer Janpad Panchayat Chhura, District
Gariyaband (C.G.)
--- Respondent(s)
(Cause title is taken from CIS system)
For Petitioners : Mr. R.K. Verma, Advocate
For Respondents/State : Ms. Shailja Shukla, G.A.
Hon'ble Shri Justice Parth Prateem Sahu
Order On Board
26/02/2026
1. Petitioners have filed this petition seeking following relief (s) :-
"10.1 This Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to pass
an appropriate order and call for the entire records for
the case of the petitioners.
10.2 This Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to pass
an appropriate order or issue writ and direct the
respondent authorities to grant the amount/benefit of
Kramonnati Vetanman to petitioners in view of Circular
dated 10.03.2017 issued by the State Government
along with an interest @ 18% per annum, from the date
of completion of 10 years of service till the actual
payment of Kramonnati vetanman within a stipulated
period of 30 days, in the interest of justice.
10.3 This Hon'ble Court may further be pleased to
pass an appropriate order or issue writ as deemed fit
under the facts and circumstances of the case"
2. Learned counsel for petitioners submits that petitioners are entitled for
Kramonnati Vetanman in terms of decision in case of Sona Sahu Vs.
State of Chhattisgarh, in W.A. No.261 of 2023, decided on 28.02.2024.
3. Learned State counsel opposes the submission of learned counsel for
petitioners and would submit that case of the petitioners is different
than that of case of Sona Sahu. Petitioners were earlier employee of
Panchayat Department and thereafter, he was absorbed in Education
Department pursuant to policy decision taken by State Government on
30.06.2018. Petitioners were not appointed as regular Assistant
Teacher by School Education Department but was appointed by
Janpad Panchayat. Coordinate Bench of this Court has considered the
issue with regard to grant of Kramonnati Vetanman to such employee
in WPS No.11009 of 2025 and other batch of writ petitions and has
dismissed those writ petitions.
4. Petitioners upon asking do not dispute the submission of learned State
counsel with respect to their initial appointment under Panchayat
Department by Janpad Panchayat as also decision in WP(S) No.11009
of 2025.
5. The Coordinate Bench of this Court while considering the batch of writ
petitions lead case bearing WPS No. 11009 of 2025 with regard to
grant of Kramonnati to petitioners therein, has dismissed the writ
petitions and observed thus :-
"35. Considering the facts of the case that the
petitioners till absorption in pursuance of the policy
dated 30.06.2018 are not teachers of the School
Education Department, they were shikshakarmis though
their designation has been changed as Assistant
Teacher (panchayat), Teacher (panchayat) and Lecturer
(panchayat) respectively and they are governed by the
separate rules framed under the Panchayat Raj
Adhiniyam, 1993, therefore, the petitioners are not
fulfilling the criteria as laid down in the circular dated
10.03.2017, the bunch of the writ petitions are liable to
be dismissed, accordingly, they are dismissed."
6. Since the facts of the case of petitioners as is identical to the facts of
the case in WP(S) No.11009 of 2025 is not disputed, this petition is
also dismissed in terms of order passed in WPS No.11009 of 2025 and
other connected case decided on 24.11.2025.
Sd/-
(Parth Prateem Sahu)
Judge
Balram
