[Cites 2, Cited by 0]
Chattisgarh High Court
Smt. Yogita Sahu vs State Of Chhattisgarh on 9 March, 2026
1
2026:CGHC:11173
NAFR
HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR
WPS No. 2252 of 2026
1 - Smt. Yogita Sahu W/o Shri Nilkanth Sahu Aged About 39 Years Posted And
Working As Lecturer (L.B.) At Govt. Higher Secondary School, Karga, Block Kurud,
District Dhamtari (C.G.)
... Petitioner
Versus
1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Secretary, School Education Department,
Mantralaya, Mahanadi Bhawan, Atal Nagar, Nawa Raipur, District Raipur (C.G.)
2 - The Secretary Panchayat And Rural Development Department, Mantralaya,
Mahanadi Bhawan, Atal Nagar, Nawa Raipur, District- Raipur (C.G.)
3 - Director Directorate Of Public Instructions, Indrawati Bhawan, Atal Nagar, Nawa
Raipur, District- Raipur (C.G.)
4 - Commissioner-Cum-Director Directorate Of Panchayat, Atal Nagar, Nawa
Raipur, District- Raipur (C.G.)
5 - Joint Director Education Division, Raipur, District- Raipur (C.G.)
6 - District Education Officer Dhamtari, District- Dhamtari (C.G.)
7 - Chief Executive Officer District Panchayat, Dhamtari, District- Dhamtari (C.G.)
8 - Chief Executive Officer Janpad Panchayat Kurud, District- Dhamtari (C.G.)
9 - Block Education Officer Block Kurud, District- Dhamtari (C.G.)
... Respondents
For Petitioner : Mr. Ankush Soni, Advocate
For Respondents-State : Mr. Love Sharma, Panel Lawyer
S.B. Hon'ble Shri Justice Parth Prateem Sahu
Order On Board
09/03/2026
1. Petitioner has filed this petition seeking following relief (s) :-
"10.1 That, this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to
issue a writ of mandamus quashing the impugned order
dated 30.09.2025 (Annexure P/1) passed by the
Respondent No. 3.
10.2 That, this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to
direct the respondent authorities to consider the case of
the petitioner for grant of Kramonnati Vetanmaan on
completion of 10 years of services in light of the circular
dated 10.03.2017 issued by the State Government and
order passed by the Hon'ble Division Bench in case of
Smt. Sona Sahu Vs. State of Chhattisgarh vide order
dated 28.02.2024.
10.3 This Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to
direct the respondent authorities to grant all benefit of
petitioner including the arrears of pay with 18% interest
per annum from the date of completion of 10 years of
services till the actual payment of Kramonnati
Vetanmaan within the stipulated period of 30 days.
10.4 That, this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to
dispose of the instant writ petition with similar order
passed in the case of Smt. Sona Sahu Vs. State of
Chhattisgarh & Ors. in Writ Appeal No. 261/2023 order
passed on 28.02.2024.
10.5 That, any other relief may also be granted to the
petitioner which this Hon'ble Court deemed fit in facts
and circumstances of the case."
2. Learned counsel for petitioner submits that petitioner is 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
petitioner and would submit that case of the petitioner is different than
that of case of Sona Sahu (Supra). Petitioner was 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. Petitioner was not appointed as regular Assistant Teachers
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. Petitioner upon asking do not dispute the submission of learned State
counsel with respect to his 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 petitioner 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/-
Digitally
SHUBHAM signed by
(Parth Prateem Sahu)
DEY SHUBHAM
DEY
Judge
Dey
