Disposed

Raghuvar Prasad Choudhary v. State of Chhattisgarh and Ors.

Chhattisgarh HC5 Jan 2012WPS/19/2012

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In this writ petition under Article 226, the High Court of Chhattisgarh allowed the petitioner liberty to file a representation regarding his pay scales, relying on similar precedents and directing the respondent authority to decide it within eight weeks.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner granted liberty to make a representation; respondent directed to decide representation within eight weeks.

Raghuvar Prasad Choudhary Vs State of… — Service and Employment | Chhattisgarh HC (2012)

¶1

IN THE_ HIGH_COURT OF JUDICATORE OF CHHATTISGARH ATBILASPUR '

¶2

W.P.fS.lNO.^) /2012

¶3

'Raghuvar Prasad Prasad Chpudhary S/6 Bahadur Choudhary, aged about 51 years, Oecupation Service as Headmaster, Posted at Govt; Prim.ary School Ghenspali, Block Saraipali.. Dist Matiasamund .. (G.G.)

¶4

PETITIONER 'Raghuvar Prasad Prasad Chpudhary
S/6 Bahadur Choudhary, aged
about 51 years, Oecupation
••'^y Service as Headmaster, Posted at
Govt; Prim.ary School Ghenspali,
^i^
/'<flS'>»VN" ^f^ Block Saraipali.. Dist Matiasamund
^tsY (G.G.)
^^ VERSUS
'M
RESPONDENTS 1. State of Chhattisgarh
Through : The Secretary,
School Education Departmenf
D.K.S. Bhawan, RaipurfC.G.)
2. The Distriet Education Officer,
Mahasamund Distt Maha.samurid
^^
'^^ Z2->?*'v- (C.G.) , ; ; ' •.
i<t9.irj t.
'^ 3. Block Education Officer, Bloek
1W ; -.I^
^sw^
Saraipali, District MahaSaiiiynd
'
• • : 1:
(C.G.) :: ,.

¶5

WRTT PETmQN UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF THE CONSTmjnON OF INDIA F'OR ISSUANCE QF WRTTIN NATttRE OF MANDAMUS CERTIORARY OR ANY OTHERlWRITOF LIKE NATURE ETC.

¶6

The petitioner paoSt teumbly and reSpectfuUy begs to Subinit as under :

¶7

¶8

HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR

¶9

S;B: Hon'ble Shri Prashant Kumar Mishra. J.

¶10

Writ Petition (S} No. 19/2012

¶11

PETITIONER Ftaghuvar Prasad Choudhary

¶12

Versus

¶13

RESPONDENTS State of Ghhattisgarh and others

¶14

ADpearance:

¶15

Shri Dhani Ram Patel, counset for the petitioner. Shri Satlsh Gupta, G.A. for the State.

¶16

WRIT PETITION UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF THE CONSTITUTION OFINDIA

¶17

ORALORDER (5.01.2012)

¶18

Grievance of the petitioner in the present petition is that the petitioner was initially appointed as Assistant Teacher on a fixed pay of Rs.150/- and after completion of his probation period, he was granted regular pay scale of Rs. 169-300.

¶19

<2) Learned counsei for the petitioner submits that fte above issue ,fc«M\ has/considered by the Madhya Pradesh State Administrative Tribunal, Jabalpur in O.A. No. 2745/89 between Madhuhant Yadu and 56 oiheis Vs. State ofM.P. & otlwrs, wherein it was held that the similariy sHuated teachers are entitled to regular pay scale w.e.f. the date of initial appointment. The matler was taken up to Hon'ble Supreme Court. The petition^{wasdismissedbytheHon'bleSupremeCourtupholdingflie} decision of the Tribunal to-tbe effect that the Teachere/Assistant Teachere are entitted to regular pay scate from the date of initial appointment. It is further submitted that this court while considering the same issue in W.P. (S) No. 4725/2006 between Amar Sai Ram & others Vs. State of Chhattisgaih & ottiers by order dated 01.09.2006, allowed the petitionere to make a representation within a period of ten days, raising all the - gnevances.

¶20

(3) Accordingly, the petitioner is granted liberty to mafce a representation raising all his grievanees in ttie light of the aforesakl judgment and the circular dated 13/01/2009 & 11/01/2011 (Annexure P-2), and in tum ttie con<»rned respondent is directed to lecide the representation, if any, in accordance with law, on its own

¶21

!!J^i{fE?Bi^TII! !ilU.i_i;li!il

¶22

¶23

¶24

merits, within a period of eight weeks from ttie date of receipt of the . representation subject to verification of ths facts.

¶25

(4) In view of fte foregoing, this petition is disposed of. No order as to
costs.

Sd//Mishra

;,;'-<br>

s ;* - ^^

jff^it.sgiBy'^3 l:,ljil1 :i.ll[j;l iSBFiflt

¶30

^laMs

¶31

..•aSSSSgSK

Raghuvar Prasad Choudhary v. State of Chhattisgarh and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Raghuvar Prasad Choudhary v. State of Chhattisgarh and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Smt.Vibha Sahay Vs State of Chhattisgarh and Anr.

S.K.Mahale Vs Union of India and Ors.

C.G. Rajya Karamchari Sangh Vs State of Chhattisgarh and Ors.

Steel Authority of India Vs Lekhram and Ors.

Rp.Singh Vs P.C.I. New Delhi and Ors.

Chinta Ram Lahare Vs State of Chhattisgarh and Ors.