Disposed

Atul Sharma v. State of Chhattisgarh

Chhattisgarh HC17 Nov 2024WPS/743/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In two writ petitions concerning withdrawal of increments granted to lecturers due to non-possession of B.Ed./D.Ed., the Chhattisgarh High Court disposed of the matters by directing the Respondents to examine the claims in accordance with the order in Jayant Kumar Patle v. State of Chhattisgarh (2017).

What did the court decide?

Direction to examine Petitioners' claim in terms of the order in Jayant Kumar Patle v. State of Chhattisgarh (2017).

Atul Sharma Vs State of Chhattisgarh — Education and Admissions | Chhattisgarh HC (2024)

¶1

1 / 3

¶2

Digitally signed by GOPAL SINGH Date: 2024.11.20 19:28:12 +0530

¶3

2024:CGHC:44866

¶4

NAFR

¶5

HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR

¶6

WPS No. 743 of 2018

¶7

1 - Atul Sharma S/o Shri Sanat Sharma Aged About 28 Years Presently Working As Lecturer ( Nagariya Nikay ) At Government Higher Secondary School, Pandariya Block Kawardha District Kabirdham Chhattisgarh

¶8

---- Petitioner

¶9

versus

¶10

1 - State of Chhattisgarh Through The Secretary Department of Urban Administration and Development, Mantralaya, Mahanadi Bhawan, Naya Raipur, District Raipur Chhattisgarh

¶11

2 - Commissioner-cum-Director, Department of Urban Administration and Development, Mantralaya, Indrawati Bhawan, Naya Raipur, District Raipur, Chhattisgarh

¶12

3 - Chief Municipal Officer, Municipal Council, Kawardha, District Kabirdham, Chhattisgarh

¶13

4 - Block Education Officer, Pandariya, District Kabirdham, Chhattisgarh 5 - Chief Municipal Officer, Nagar Panchayat, Pandariya, DistrictKabirdham, Chhattisgarh

¶14

---- Respondents

¶15

and

¶16

WPS No. 2980 of 2018

¶17

1 - Deepti Tamrakar D/o Shri Vishnu Prasad Tamrakar, Aged About 37

¶18

2 / 3

¶19

Years, Presently Working As Lecturer (Nagariya Nikay) At Govt. Girls Higher Secondary School, Abhanpur, Block Abhanpur, District Raipur, Chhattisgarh

¶20

---- Petitioner

¶21

versus

¶22

1 - State of Chhattisgarh Through The Secretary, Department of Urban Administration And Development, Mantralaya, Mahanadi Bhawan, Naya Raipur, District- Raipur, Chhattisgarh

¶23

2 - Commissioner-cum-Director, Department of Urban Administration And Development, Mantralaya, Indrawati Bhawan, Naya Raipur, DistrictRaipur, Chhattisgarh

¶24

3 - Chief Municipal Officer, Municipal Council Abhanpur, District- Raipur, Chhattisgarh.

¶25

4 - Block Education Officer, Abhanpur, District- Raipur, Chhattisgarh

¶26

---- Respondents

¶27

(Cause title is taken from Case Information System)

¶28

For Petitioners	: Shri C.J.K. Rao, Advocate
For Respective	: Shri R.C.S. Deo, Panel Lawyer and Ms.
Respondents	Natasha Khan, Advocate on behalf of Shri Yashwant Singh Thakur, Advocate

¶29

Hon’ble Shri Justice Amitendra Kishore Prasad

¶30

Order on Board

¶31

18/11/2024

¶32

1. The Petitioners are aggrieved by the action of the Respondents, whereby the increment granted to the Petitioners is being withdrawn on the ground that they have not passed B.Ed./D.Ed. Examination.

¶33

2. Learned Counsel appearing for the Petitioners submits that the

¶34

3 / 3

¶35

issue with regard to withdrawal/non-grant of increment on the ground of having not passed B.Ed./D.Ed. Examination was examined by this Court in the case of Jayant Kumar Patle v. State of Chhattisgarh (WPS No.4271 of 2017 and batch of petitions, vide order dated 3.11.2017) and various directions have been issued for affording proper opportunity of hearing and then decide the matter.

¶36

3. Learned Counsel appearing for the State submits that the Petitioners’ claim would be examined after affording opportunity of hearing in terms of the order dated 3.11.2017 passed in the case of Jayant Kumar Patle (supra).

¶37

4. Considering the aforesaid submissions, both the petitions are finally disposed of with a direction to the Respondents for examination of Petitioners’ claim in terms of the order passed by this Court in the case of Jayant Kumar Patle (supra) and take appropriate decision thereon.

¶38

5. Both the writ petitions stand accordingly disposed of.

¶39

( Amitendra Kishore Prasad ) JUDGE

¶40

Gopal Singh

Atul Sharma v. State of Chhattisgarh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Atul Sharma 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

South Eastern Coalfields Limited Vs Chhattisgarh State Power Distribution Company Limited And Ors.

Smt.Chandrabhaga Bai (Died) through Lrs- Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Md. Noor Ansari Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Lal Bahadur Tiwari Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Deepti Tamrakar Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Laxmi Prasad and Ors. Vs State Of Chhattisgarh and Ors.