Disposed

Smt. Sarita Kumar v. State of Chhattisgarh

Chhattisgarh HC3 Feb 2020WPS/380/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The petition was disposed of by granting the petitioner liberty to make a representation before the competent authority regarding entitlement to Kramonnati after ten years of service, with a directive to decide expeditiously.

What did the court decide?

Liberty granted to make a representation before the concerned authority regarding Kramonnati eligibility to be decided within four months.

Smt. Sarita Kumar Vs State of Chhattisgarh — Education and Admissions | Chhattisgarh HC (2020)

¶1

NAFR

¶2

HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR

¶3

WPS No. 380 of 2020

¶4

Smt. Sarita Kumar W/o Shri Krishan Kumar Aged About 36 Years Assistant Teacher (L.B.) Government Primary School Echhapur, District Kanker, Chhattisgarh

¶5

---- Petitioner Versus

¶6

State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Secretary, School Education Department, Mahanadi Bhawan, Atal Nagar, New Raipur, Chhattisgarh

¶7

District Education Officer Kanker, District : Kanker, Chhattisgarh

¶8

	---- Respondents
For Petitioner	: Mr. Somkant Verma, Advocate
For Respondent/ State	: Mr. Kapil Maini, PL

¶9

Hon'ble Shri Justice Goutam Bhaduri

¶10

Order On Board

¶11

03.02.2020

¶12

Heard.

¶13

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is entitled for Kramonnati as per circulars dated 19.04.1999, 28.04.2008, 03.10.2008 and 11.01.2010 after completion of 10 years of service. He submits that the issue involved in the present petition has already been considered and decided by this Court in the matter of R.S. Verma Vs. State of Chhattisgarh and Others (W.P.(S) No.2805/2002 by judgment and order dated 29.08.2006. He further submits that the petitioner may be granted liberty to make a representation to consider the case of the petitioner in the light of the judgment passed by the Hon'ble Apex Court in the matter of State of Tripura and Others Vs.

¶14

K.K. Roy (2004 SCW/1) and the order passed in R.S. Verma (supra) top which learned counsel for the respondent/State has no objection.

¶15

Accordingly, the liberty sought for by the petitioner is granted to make a representation before the concerned authority. It is expected from the competent authority subject to verification decide the representation of the petitioner as expeditiously as possible in an objective manner preferably within a period of four months from the date of receipt of copy of this order.

¶16

In view of above, the petition is disposed of with the aforesaid liberty.

¶17

Sd/-

¶18

(Goutam Bhaduri) Judge

¶19

Yasmin

Smt. Sarita Kumar v. State of Chhattisgarh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Smt. Sarita Kumar v. State of Chhattisgarh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Shyam Sunder Dhand Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Chandrahas Sharma Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Mukesh Kumar Jain Vs State of Chhattisgarh

State of Chhattisgarh and Anr. Vs Suresh Kumar Pandey

Smt. Sushila Dhruw Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Smt. Vidya Kulkarni Vs State of Chhattisgarh