Disposed¶24

Ram Prasad Singh v. State Of Chhattisgarh

Chhattisgarh HC27 Aug 2024WPS/4134/2015

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Disposed of with liberty to revive/refile — retired teachers' claim for first and second Kramonnati (upgraded pay scales) after 12 and 24 years' service left undecided; arrears with 18% interest sought, none granted; State counsel cited Madhya Pradesh clarification dated 10.12.1984 (Clause 5) and scheme dated 05.04.1983; petitioners Ram Prasad Singh and Ramchandra Roy (Surajpur); respondents State of Chhattisgarh (School Education Department), General Administration Department and Accountant General; advocate Rahul K. Mishra for petitioners, Khulesh Sahu for State, Ashwani Shukla for Accountant General; single judge Rakesh Mohan Pandey; decision date 28.08.2024.

What did the court decide?

Liberty reserved to the petitioners to revive their prayers, if cause of action still survives. ¶24

Ram Prasad Singh Vs State Of Chhattisgarh — Chhattisgarh HC (2024) — LawSathi Research

¶1

¶2

Digitally signed by RAMESH KUMAR VATTI

¶3

2024:CGHC:32854

¶4

NAFR

¶5

HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR

¶6

W.P.(S) No. 4134 of 2015

¶7

Ram Prasad Singh son of late Shri Yamuna Singh, Caste- Kshatriya, aged about 72 years, Retired Teacher, resident of Village- Khorma, Post Office- Pratappur, District- Surajpur (C.G.)

¶8

Ramchandra Roy son of late Shri Rajnarayan Roy, Caste- Brahman, aged about 72 years, Retired Teacher, resident of Village- Pratappur, Post Office- Pratappur, District Surajpur (C.G.). ... Petitioners

¶9

versus

¶10

State of Chhattisgarh, Through the Secretary, School Education Department, Mantralaya, Mahanadi Bhawan, New Raipur, Police Station Rakhi, District- Raipur (C.G.)

¶11

The Secretary, General Administration Department, Government of Chhattisgarh, Mahanadi Bhawan, New Raipur, Police Station Rakhi, District Raipur (C.G.)

¶12

The Accountant General, Government of Chhattisgarh, Raipur (C.G.)

¶13

... Respondents

¶14

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ For Petitioners : Mr. Rahul K. Mishra, Advocate For Respondents No. 1 &2/State : Mr. Khulesh Sahu, Panel Lawyer

¶15

For Respondent No.3 : Mr. Ashwani Shukla, Advocate ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Hon’ble Shri Justice Rakesh Mohan Pandey Order on Board

¶16

28.08.2024

¶17

By way of this petition, the petitioners have sought the following relief(s):-

¶18

“ 10.1 That, this Hon’ble Court may kindly be pleased to issue an appropriate writ/direction/order to respondent authorities to grant the benefit of first Kramonnati on completion of 12 years service from the date of their joining and second kramonnati after completion of 24 years thereof, with all consequential benefits.

¶19

10.2 That, this Hon’ble Court may kindly be pleased to direct the respondent authorities to pay arrears of salary to the petitioners, with interest @ 18% per annum from the date of their entitlement to its payment.

¶20

¶21

10.3 That, any other relief/order which may deem fit and just in the facts and circumstances of the case including award of the costs of the petition may be given.”

¶22

Mr. Khulesh Sahu, learned Panel Lawyer, appearing for the respondents No. 1 & 2/State, would submit that as per clarification issued by the erstwhile State of Madhya Pradesh dated 10.12.1984, Clause – 5, whether the government servant who has completed 20 years of services would be entitled to get two upgraded pay scale and this clause has been answered that same is not permissible. It is further clarified that this scheme was floated on 05.04.1983 and on that date, if the government servant has completed 12 or 20 years of service, he would be entitled to get one upgraded pay scale and after completion of 08 years (without promotion), he would be entitled to get second upgraded pay scale.

¶23

Mr. Rahul K. Mishra, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, would endorse the submission made by Mr. Khulesh Sahu and would submit that the petitioners may be permitted to file afresh petition, if cause of action still survives.

¶24

Taking into consideration the submissions made by Mr. Khulesh Sahu and Mr. Rahul K. Mishra, this petition is disposed of reserving liberty in favour of the petitioners to revive their prayers, if cause of action still survives.

¶25

Consequently, the instant petition is hereby disposed of .

¶26

Sd/-

¶27

(Rakesh Mohan Pandey) Judge

¶28

vatti

Ram Prasad Singh v. State Of Chhattisgarh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ram Prasad Singh v. State Of Chhattisgarh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Vinay Kumar Nanda Vs State Of Chhattisgarh and Ors.

Smt. Paratima Devi Vs State Of Chhattisgarh

Peter Kerketta Vs State Of Chhattisgarh

Kamal Singh Sahu (Died) Through Legal Heir Vs State Of Chhattisgarh

Gopal Singh Thakur And Ors. Vs State Of Chhattisgarh And Ors.

Mahendra Kumar Patel And Anr. Vs State Of Chhattisgarh And Ors.