Chander Sai Shyam Vs State Of Chhattisgarh And Ors.

¶1

-1-

¶2

NAFR

¶3

HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR

¶4

WPS No. 1660 of 2014

¶5

Chander Sai Shyam, S/o Shri Jabran Shyam, Aged About 45 Years, By Post Assistant Teacher Panchayat, At Present Posted At Govt Primary School At Lamksasa, Block Basna, Janapad Panchayat, Basna, Ps And Tah Basna, Civil and Revenue Distt. Mahasamund, Chhattisgarh. ---- Petitioner

¶6

Versus

¶7

1. State of Chhattisgarh,Through the Secretary/ Under Secretary, Department of Panchayat And Rural Development, New Mantralaya, Mahanadi Bhawan, New Raipur, Distt Raipur, Chhattisgarh.

¶8

2. The Chief Executive Officer, Zila Panchayat, Mahasamund, Distt Mahasamund, District : Mahasamund, Chhattisgarh.

¶9

3. The Chief Executive Officer, Janpad Panchayat, Basna, Distt Mahasamund, District : Mahasamund, Chhattisgarh.

¶10

4. Block Education Officer, Basna, Distt Mahasamund, District : Mahasamund, Chhattisgarh. ---- Respondents

¶11

(Cause Title is taken from Case Information System)

¶12

For Petitioner : Mr. Jameel Akhtar Lohani, Advocate

¶13

For State : Ms. Saumya Sharma, Panel Lawyer

¶14

Hon'ble Shri Justice Rakesh Mohan Pandey

¶15

Order on Board

¶16

12.07.2024

¶17

1. The petitioner has filed this petition seeking the following relief(s):-

¶18

“10.i. That this Hon'ble Court kindly be pleased to issue a writ to the respondents to produce the entire record pertaining to impugned-Order dtd. 22/01/2014 & 04/12/2013.Annexure-P/1.

¶19

ii. That this Honble Court may kindly quash the impugned-Circular dtd. 22/01/2014 & 04/12/2013 condition mention at Para-07 to 08 issued by The Secretary & Under-Secretary, Department Of Panchayat & Rural Development, be quashed on the ground of non-availability of any reason or material or any irregularity against the petitioner, directing not to reduce the benefit of revised pay-scale.

¶20

Iii. And further, allow this Writ-Petition by passing other relief in favor of petitioner directing the respondent-authority to pay the Salary at payscale of Rs.9300-34800-4200 in place of Rs.5200-20200+2400 in view

¶21

-2-

¶22

of Circular dtd. 17/05/2013 for the post of Assistant-Teacher (Panchayat), including all consequential benefits.

¶23

iv. And further, allow this Writ-Petition by passing any other reliefs) in favor of petitioner by passing appropriate directions to the respondents as may deemed fit by this Hon'ble Court.”

¶24

1. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would submit that the issue involved in the present petition has already been considered and decided by this Court in WPS No.2086 of 2014 in the matter of Smt. Rekha Haiwar v. State of Chhattisgarh and others decided on 09.05.2024; thus, he would pray that the instant petition may also be

¶25

disposed of in same terms.

¶26

1. Learned State would endorse the submission made by the counsel for the petitioner.

¶27

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

¶28

1. During the course of hearing, it has been brought to the notice of this Court that various writ petitions challenging the circular dated 22-1-2014 were filed and such bunch of petitions bearing WPS No.1654 of 2014 (Smt. Surekha Sagar v State of Chhattisgarh

¶29

and Others) and other connected writ petitions were disposed of by this Court vide order dated 6-10-2021 wherein after considering the entire facts and circumstances of the case, the Court allowed the petitioners therein to make representation to the Secretary, Panchayat and Rural Development Department within four weeks by highlighting their grievance. In the said order, the Court observed thus at para 9 :

¶30

“9) In view of the aforesaid legal position as obtaining today, the petitioners are allowed to make representation to the Secretary, Panchayat and Rural Department within four weeks from today highlighting their grievance claiming the benefit of revised pay scale as they claims to have completed eight years of service which will be considered by the competent authority within a period of three months from the date of making the said representation by passing a reasoned and speaking order strictly in accordance with law. It is made clear that this Court has not expressed any opinion on the merits of the matter.”

¶31

-3-

¶32

In view of the above, I do not find any reason to deviate from such order. Accordingly, the petitioner is granted liberty to make a representation before the Secretary, Department of Panchayat and Rural Development, within a period of four weeks from today claiming the benefit of revised pay scale on the ground that she has completed required service tenure. On such representation being made, the same shall be considered and decided by the competent authority within a period of three months from the date of making the said representation by passing a reasoned and speaking order strictly in accordance with law.

¶33

1. Accordingly, the present writ petition stands disposed of .

¶34

Sd/-

¶35

(Rakesh Mohan Pandey) Judge

¶36

Nadim

Chander Sai Shyam v. State Of Chhattisgarh And Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Chander Sai Shyam v. State Of Chhattisgarh And Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Radheshyam Khairwar and Ors. Vs State Of Chhattisgarh and Ors.

Siyaram Verma Vs Chhattisgarh State Co-operative and Ors.

Prakash Chand Sahu and Ors. Vs State Of Chhattisgarh and Ors.

Devbharat Sahu and Anr. Vs State Of Chhattisgarh and Ors.

S.d. Yadav Vs Union Of India and Ors.

Dr. Datta Mainkar Vs State Of Chhattisgarh and Ors.