[Cites 1, Cited by 0]
Chattisgarh High Court
Ramakant Sharma vs The State Of Chhattisgarh on 25 March, 2026
1
2026:CGHC:14228
NAFR
HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR
WPS No. 2771 of 2026
1 - Ramakant Sharma Retired Field Assistant Work Charged Category, Water
Resources Division Rajnandgaon, S/o Onkar Prasad Sharma, Aged About 75
Years, R/o House No. 24, Diparapara Shivaji Ward No. 21, Dongargarh,
District- Rajnandgaon, Chhattisgarh-491445
--- Petitioner(s)
versus
1 - The State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Chief Secretary, Government Of
Chhattisgarh, Mantralaya, Mahanadi Bhawan, Naya Raipur, District- Raipur,
Chhattisgarh 492002
2 - The State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Secretary, General
Administration Department, Government Of Chhattisgarh, Mantralaya,
Mahanadi Bhavan, Naya Raipur, District- Raipur, Chhattisgarh 492002
3 - The State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Secretary, Water Resources
Department, Government Of Chhattisgarh, Mantralaya, Mahanadi Bhawan,
Naya Raipur, District- Raipur, Chhattisgarh 492002
4 - The Engineer In Chief Water Resources Department, Shivnath Bhawan,
Nawa Raipur, Atal Nagar, District- Raipur, Chhattisgarh-492002
5 - The Chief Engineer Water Resources Department, Mahanadi Godavari
Basin, Raipur, District- Raipur, Chhattisgarh.
6 - The Superintending Engineer Water Resources Department, Shivnath
Circle-Durg, District- Durg, Chhattisgarh.
7 - The Executive Engineer Water Resources Department, Division
Rajnandgaon, District- Rajnandgaon, Chhattisgarh.
8 - The Sub Division Officer Water Resources Department, Sub Division
BALRAM
PRASAD Dongargarh, District- Rajnandgaon, Chhattisgarh.
DEWANGAN
Digitally signed
by BALRAM --- Respondent(s)
PRASAD
DEWANGAN
For Petitioner : Mr. Ashwin Panickar, Advocate
For Respondents- State : Ms. Sakshi Bajpai, Panel lawyer
S.B.: Hon'ble Shri Parth Prateem Sahu, Judge
Order on Board
25/03/2026
1. Petitioner has filed this writ petition seeking following reliefs:-
"10.1 The Hon'ble Court may call for records
from the respondents.
10.2 The Hon'ble Court may direct the
respondents to grant the benefits of higher
pay scale to the period of service of
petitioner and revise the pension of the
petitioner as per the gazette notification
dated 14.10.1982.
10.3 The Hon'ble Court may direct the
respondents to pay arrears of salary and
pension to the petitioner.
10.4 The Hon'ble Court may direct the
respondents to remove the anomaly in the
service of the petitioner.
10.5 The Hon'ble Court may kindly be
pleased to issue writ/order/direction similar
to the order passed on 09.06.2025 in
WPS/3524/2025 directing the respondent
authorities to consider and decide fresh
representation in the light of gazette
notification dated 14.10.1982 expeditiously
preferably within a period of six months from
the date of receipt/ production of a certified
copy of this order.
10.6 The Hon'ble Court may grant cost of
petition to the petitioner.
10.7 The Hon'ble Court may grant any
other relief as this Hon'ble Court deem fit
and proper in the nature and circumstances
of the present case in the interest of justice."
2. Learned counsel for petitioner submits that in similarly situated facts
and the question of law, a batch of the writ petitions, the leading case
of which was Writ Petition (S) No. 2904 of 2005 [Dwarikadas
Vaishnav & another Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh (now
Chhattisgarh) and others] has been considered and decided by the
Coordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated 05.12.2012, in which,
the petitioners, in those cases, have been granted liberty to file a fresh
representation before competent authority, therefore, this writ petition
may also be disposed off in light of that order directing the
respondents-Competent Authority to consider the case of the
petitioner for revision of pay scale in accordance with the Notification
dated 14.10.1992 (which was modified subsequently as 14.10.1982)
issued by State of Madhya Pradesh, as petitioner was earlier working
as daily wage employees and subsequently, his services were
regularized.
3. Learned counsel appearing for the State/respondents would submit
that earlier the respondent/State had already considered the issue of
the petitioner in the light of the judgment passed by State
Administrative Tribunal, Gwalior Bench in Laxmi Narayan Upadhyay
v. State of M.P., however, he submits that if the petitioner submits
fresh representation, the concerned authorities shall consider his case
in light of the notification as mentioned herein above.
4. On due consideration of the submissions made by learned counsel for
the respective parties, this petition is disposed of directing the
petitioner to file fresh representation before the competent authority,
and in the event such representation is filed, the concerned competent
authority shall consider and decide the same in light of the aforesaid
notification, in accordance with law, expeditiously preferably within a
period of 06 months from the date of receipt/production of a certified
copy of this order.
5. With the aforesaid observation and direction, this writ petitions are
disposed of.
Sd/-
(Parth Prateem Sahu)
Judge
Balram
