Disposed¶28

Mrs. Punam Sarita Lakra v. State of Chhattisgarh

Chhattisgarh HC14 Jul 2025WPS/6366/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

WPS No. 6366 of 2025, High Court of Chhattisgarh, Ravindra Kumar Agrawal J., revised pay scale, arrears, Teacher (Panchayat), Local Body teacher, 8 years of service, notification dated 17-05-2013, order dated 07-10-2016, period 17-06-2013 to 05-12-2018, representation direction, decide within 10 weeks, Avinesh Kumar Namdev WPS No. 5328 of 2021, Mukesh Kumar Patel WPS No. 2530 of 2017, Zila Panchayat Sarangarh, Janpad Panchayat Sarangarh, Sarangarh-Bhilaigarh, writ petition disposed.

What did the court decide?

Liberty to submit representation before respondents No. 4 to 6, with a direction to those respondents to consider and decide the representation at the earliest, preferably within 10 weeks from receipt, in accordance with law, subject to verification of facts, keeping in mind the decision in Avinesh Kumar Namdev (supra).

Mrs. Punam Sarita Lakra Vs State of Chhattisgarh — Chhattisgarh HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶28

Issue for consideration

Whether the petitioner, a Teacher (Panchayat) who completed 8 years of service on 17-06-2013 and was granted the revised pay-scale by order dated 07-10-2016, is entitled to payment of arrears of the revised pay-scale for the intervening period from 17-06-2013 to 05-12-2018.

¶25

Court's answer

The writ petition is finally disposed of, permitting the petitioner to submit a representation before respondents No. 4 to 6, who are directed to consider and decide it at the earliest, preferably within 10 weeks from the date of receipt of the representation, in accordance with law, subject to verification of the facts and keeping in mind the decision in Avinesh Kumar Namdev (supra).

¶27

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Service matter — revised pay-scale arrears. Petitioner, a Post Teacher (Local Body) at Government Upper Primary School, Chantipali, claimed entitlement to the revised pay-scale on completion of 8 years of service on 17-06-2013 under the State Government notification dated 17-05-2013; the benefit was extended by order dated 07-10-2016 but arrears for the period 17-06-2013 to 05-12-2018 were not paid. Citing WPS No. 2530 of 2017 (Mukesh Kumar Patel v. State of Chhattisgarh) and the co-ordinate Bench decision in Avinesh Kumar Namdev v. State of Chhattisgarh (WPS No. 5328 of 2021), counsel sought redressal through representation. Learned counsel for the State submitted that the representation would be considered and decided by respondent No. 5. Allowing the prayer, Ravindra Kumar Agrawal, J., finally disposed of the writ petition, permitting the petitioner to submit a representation before respondents No. 4 to 6, who were directed to decide it preferably within 10 weeks of receipt, in accordance with law, subject to verification of facts and keeping in mind the decision in Avinesh Kumar Namdev (supra). No monetary relief was awarded at this stage.

¶1

¶2

Digitally signed by SAGRIKA SAGRIKA AGRAWAL AGRAWAL Date: 2025.07.17 10:51:25 +0530

¶3

NAFR

¶4

HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR

¶5

WPS No. 6366 of 2025

¶6

1 - Mrs. Punam Sarita Lakra W/o Mr. Kuldeep Lakra, Aged About 40 Years Post Teacher, (Local Body), Posted At Government Upper Primary School, Chantipali, Block Sarangarh, Distt. Sarangarh-Bhilaigarh (C.G.)

¶7

... Petitioner(s)

¶8

versus

¶9

1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Secretary, School Education Department, Mantralaya, Naya Raipur Distt. Raipur (C.G.)

¶10

2 - Secretary Panchayat And Rural Development Department, Mantralaya, Naya Raipur Distt. Raipur (C.G.)

¶11

3 - Director Panchayat And Rural Development Department, Mantralaya, Naya Raipur, Distt. Raipur (C.G.)

¶12

4 - District Education Officer District Sarangarh-Bhilaigarh (C.G.)

¶13

5 - Zila Panchayat Sarangarh, Through It Chief Executive Officer, Zila Panchayat District Sarangarh- Bhilaigarh (C.G.)

¶14

6 - Janpad Panchayat Sarangarh, Through It Chief Executive Officer, Janpad Panchayat , Sarangarh, District Sarangarh - Bhilaigarh (C.G.)

¶15

... Respondent(s)

¶16

For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Parag Kotecha, Advocate For Respondent(s) : Mr. Santosh Bharat, Panel Lawyer

¶17

¶18

Hon'ble Shri Justice Ravindra Kumar Agrawal, J.

¶19

Order on Board

¶20

15/07/2025

¶21

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner became entitled for the revised pay-scale after completion of 8 years of service on 17-06-2013, which is also mentioned in the order dated 07-10-2016, whereby benefit of revised pay-scale is extended to the petitioner, but arrears of the revised pay-scale from 17-06-2013 to 05-12-2018 is not paid.

¶22

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that as per the notification issued by the State Government dated 17-05-2013, the Teacher (Panchayat) who has completed 8 years of service is entitled for the revised pay scale. The petitioner was extended the benefit of revised pay scale pursuant to the notification dated 17-05-2013, but financial benefit is extended from 17-06-2013 only and not from 18-07-2013. He contended that the issue of considering the period of service in which any of the employees have worked in the lower post are to be considered is decided in WPS No. 2530 of 2017 (Mukesh Kumar Patel and another versus State of Chhattisgarh and another) and the case of the petitioner is covered by the said judgment.

¶23

He also referred to the order passed by co-ordinate Bench of this Court in case of Avinesh Kumar Namdev and Ors. Vs. State of Chhattisgarh and Ors (WPS No. 5328 of 2021). Counsel for the petitioner submits that as the issue is already considered and decided by this Court, at this stage, grievance of the petitioner would be redressed, if petitioner is permitted to submit representation before respondent No. 5 and in turn,

¶24

¶25

respondent No.5 be directed to consider and decide the representation of petitioner at the earliest for grant of arrears of revised pay scale for the intervening period from 17-06-2013 to 05-12-2018.

¶26

Learned counsel for the State submits that in view of submission of learned counsel for the petitioner, her representation will be considered and decided by respondent No. 5, at the earliest.Page No.3

¶27

Considering submissions of learned counsel for the petitioner, this petition is finally disposed of permitting the petitioner to submit a representation before respondent No. 4 to 6, who, in turn, is directed to consider and decide the representation to be submitted by petitioner at the earliest, preferably within a period of 10 weeks from the date of receipt of representation, in accordance with law, subject to verification of the facts, keeping in mind decision rendered in the case of Avinesh Kumar Namdev (supra).

¶28

With the aforementioned observation and direction, the writ petition stands disposed of.

¶29

Sd/- (Ravindra Kumar Agrawal) Judge

¶30

sagrika

Mrs. Punam Sarita Lakra v. State of Chhattisgarh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mrs. Punam Sarita Lakra 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

Cases cited

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Dinesh Kumar Vs Union of India

Devendra Kumar Harmukh Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Satpal Sharma Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Chitrasen Kulmitra Vs Arun Dev Gautam (Ips)

Narendra Kumar Pandey Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Om Prakash Verma Vs State of Chhattisgarh