Disposed

Dr. Anita Sarin v. State of Chhattisgarh

Chhattisgarh HC13 Oct 2022WPS/6393/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In this writ petition concerning annual graded promotion benefits for teaching faculty, the High Court of Chhattisgarh disposed of the matter by directing the respondents to consider and decide the petitioners' pending representations regarding Rs. 10,000 AGP entitlement within three months.

What did the court decide?

Petitioners directed to submit fresh representations if desired with the order copy; respondents to decide pending representations within three months.

Dr. Anita Sarin Vs State of Chhattisgarh — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Chhattisgarh HC (2022)

¶1

¶2

NAFR

¶3

HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR

¶4

W.P.(S) No. 6393 of 2022

¶5

Dr. Anita Sarin W/o Shri S.K. Sarin Aged About 60 Years R/o D-1 Anupam Nagar, Near T.V. Tower Raipur, Chhattisgarh.

¶6

Dr. Dipti Jha W/o Shri A.K. Jha Aged About 58 Years R/o FCI Colony, Mahadev Ghat, Changora Bhata Raipur, Chhattisgarh.

¶7

Dr. Manisha Sharma D/o Late Shri G.P. Sharma Aged About 59 Years R/o Nayapara Phool Chowk Bijli Office Road, Raipur, Chhattisgarh.

¶8

Dr. Manju Jha D/o Late Shri Rajendra Jha Aged About 58 Years R/o H-No. 69/1098 Shanti Vihar, Colony Daganiya, Raipur, Chhattisgarh.

¶9

Dr. Shikha Behera W/o Late Shri Vachan Kumar Behera Aged About 61 Years R/o Quarter 33, Avanti Vihar Raipur, Chhattisgarh.

¶10

Dr. Vinod Kumar Joshi S/o Late Shri G.L. Joshi Aged About 60 Years R/o 11, Avanti Vihar Main Road, Near Ghanshyam Provision Store, Raipur, Chhattisgarh.

¶11

---- Petitioners

¶12

Versus

¶13

State of Chhattisgarh, through : the Secretary, Department of Higher Education, Mantralaya, Mahanadi Bhawan, Atal Nagar, Nava Raipur, District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh

¶14

Commissioner, Directorate of Higher Education, Block - C Second and Third Floor, Indrawati Bhawan, Atal Nagar, Nava Raipur, District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh

¶15

---- Respondents

¶16

For Petitioners : Mr. Anand Mohan Tiwari, Advocate For Respondents/State : Ms. Hamida Siddiqui, Dy.A.G.

¶17

Hon'ble Shri Justice Parth Prateem Sahu

Order On Board

13/10/2022

Heard on default.

Learned counsel for petitioners submits the default as pointed out by the Registry is cured by filing fresh affidavit of petitioners.

¶23

Petitioners are working as Professor in Dr. Radhabai Government Navin Kanya Mahavidyalaya Raipur (C.G.). Grievance of petitioners are that respondents are not considering the claim of petitioners for grant of Rs.10,000/- as AGP.

¶24

Learned counsel for petitioners submits that petitioners have already submitted representation, before respondent No.2 for redressal of their grievances of non-payment of Rs.10,000/towards AGP for which they are entitled as per Chhattisgarh Educational Service (Collegiate Branch, Gazetted) Recruitment Rules, 2019. He submits that as per Schedule-I of Rules, 2019, pay scale of Professor and Deputy Director, Higher Education is provided at at Sr. No.4, which provides for grant of AGP of Rs.10,000/- along with pay scale. Petitioners were promoted on the post of Professor vide order dated 10.08.2007 and by virtue of Rules, 2019, petitioners are entitled for Rs.10,000/- towards AGP. He also contended that Higher Education Department, State of Chhattisgarh vide order dated 30.03.2010 granted revised pay scale to the Assistant Professor and others Staffs working in the college. Representation submitted by petitioners have not been decided till date, therefore, at this stage, grievance of petitioners would be redressed, if respondents is directed to consider and decide the representation submitted by petitioners within specified time.

¶25

Learned State counsel submits that at this stage he is having no

¶26

¶27

objection to the limited prayer made by petitioners to consider and decide representations (Annexure P-5), pending before respondent No.2.

¶28

I have heard learned counsel for parties and perused the documents placed on record.

¶29

Annexure P-1 is order of promotion dated 10.08.2007 by which Assistant Professors were promoted to the post of Professor w.e.f. 19.08.2006. Name of petitioners finds place at Sr. No.280, 292, 215, 319, 113, 356 respectively. Rules of 2019 is filed as Annexure P-3 along with Schedule-I, which prescribes pay-scale of Professor and Deputy Director, Higher Education at Sr. No.4 of Rs.37400 – 67000 + AGP 10000.

¶30

In view of aforementioned facts of the case and limited prayer made by petitioners, I find it appropriate to dispose of the writ petition directing respondents to consider and decide representations dated 28.04.2022 (Annexure P-5) submitted by petitioners within a period of 3 months from the date of receipt of copy of order passed by this Court. Petitioners will be at liberty to submit fresh representations if they so desire along with copy of order passed by this Court.

¶31

In view of the above, writ petition stands disposed off.

¶32

Sd/- (Parth Prateem Sahu) Judge

¶33

Balram

Dr. Anita Sarin v. State of Chhattisgarh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Dr. Anita Sarin 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

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Mayaram Tamboli Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Ku. Supriya Singh Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Rakesh Kumar Shukla Vs the State of Chhattisgarh

Devendra Kumar @ Ballu Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Dr. Abhaya Joglekar Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Dr. Dhruv Kumar Pandey Vs State of Chhattisgarh