Dismissed¶36

Kuleshwer Prasad Dewangan v. State of Chhattisgarh

Chhattisgarh HC22 Apr 2026WPS/3497/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Kramonnati Vetanman; Kramonnati Vetanmaan; Teacher (L.B.); Janpad Panchayat; Panchayat Department; absorption; policy dated 30.06.2018; circular dated 10.03.2017; shikshakarmi; Panchayat Raj Adhiniyam, 1993; Smt. Sona Sahu Vs. State of Chhattisgarh; W.A. No. 261 of 2023; WPS No. 11009 of 2025; School Education Department; Chhattisgarh; dismissal in terms of coordinate bench order.

What did the court decide?

The petitioner did not dispute his initial appointment under the Panchayat Department by Janpad Panchayat, nor the decision in WP(S) No. 11009 of 2025; the facts of his case are identical to that batch of cases. ¶30

Kuleshwer Prasad Dewangan Vs State of Chhattisgarh — Chhattisgarh HC (2026) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Dismissed

¶36

Issue for consideration

Whether the petitioner, initially appointed by Janpad Panchayat under the Panchayat Department and absorbed in the Education Department pursuant to the State Government policy dated 30.06.2018, is entitled to Kramonnati Vetanman on completion of 10 years of service in terms of the circular dated 10.03.2017.

¶23

Court's answer

¶30

Ratio / Principle

Since the facts of the petitioner's case, identical to WPS No. 11009 of 2025, were not disputed, the petition is dismissed in terms of the order passed in WPS No. 11009 of 2025 and other connected case decided on 24.11.2025; the petitioner is not entitled to Kramonnati Vetanman as claimed.

¶36

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Kramonnati Vetanman — Petitioner, working as Teacher (L.B.) under the School Education Department, was initially appointed by Janpad Panchayat under the Panchayat Department and absorbed in the Education Department pursuant to the State Government policy dated 30.06.2018 — Claimed Kramonnati Vetanman on completion of 10 years of service in terms of the circular dated 10.03.2017, seeking parity with the Division Bench decision in Smt. Sona Sahu Vs. State of Chhattisgarh, W.A. No. 261 of 2023 (order dated 28.02.2024) — State contended the case was covered by the Coordinate Bench decision in WPS No. 11009 of 2025 and other batch of writ petitions (decided 24.11.2025), where such absorbed employees — shikshakarmis governed by separate rules framed under the Panchayat Raj Adhiniyam, 1993, and not fulfilling the criteria of the circular dated 10.03.2017 — were dismissed — Petitioner did not dispute his initial appointment by Janpad Panchayat or the decision in WPS No. 11009 of 2025 — Writ petition dismissed in terms of the order in WPS No. 11009 of 2025.

2026:CGHC:18590

NAFR

HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR

¶5

WPS No. 3497 of 2026

¶6

1 - Kuleshwer Prasad Dewangan S/o Shri Yashwant Kumar, Aged About 45 Years R/o Posted And Working As Teacher (L.B.) At Govt. Middle School, Madeli Block - Kurud -District Dhamtari C.G.

¶7

--- Petitioner

¶8

Versus

¶9

1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Secretary, School Education Department, Mantralaya Mahanadi Bhawan, Atal Nagar Nawa Raipur District Raipur C.G.

¶10

2 - Director, Directorate Of Public Instructions, Indrawati Bhawan Atal Nagar, Nawa Raipur- District Raipur C.G.

¶11

3 - Joint Director, Education Division, Raipur District Raipur C.G.

¶12

4 - District Education Officer, Dhamtari District- Dhamtari C.G.

¶13

5 - Block Education Officer, Kurud , District- Dhamtari C.G.

¶14

6 - Chief Executive Officer, District- Panchayat, Dhamtari District - Dhamtari C.G.

¶15

7 - Chief Executive Officer, Janpad Panchayat Kurud, District -Dhamtari C.G.

¶16

--- Respondents

¶17

For Petitioner : Mr. Ankush Soni, Advocate For Respondents-State : Mr. Suyashdhar Badgaiyan, Government Advocate

¶18

S.B. Hon'ble Shri Justice Parth Prateem Sahu Order On Board

¶19

23/04/2026

¶20

¶21

Petitioner has filed this petition seeking following relief (s) :-

¶22

“10.1 That, this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to issue a writ of mandamus quashing the impugned order dated 30.09.2025 (Annexure P/1) passed by the Respondent No. 2.

¶23

10.2 That, this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to direct the respondent authorities to consider the case of the petitioner for grant of Kramonnati Vetanmaan on completion of 10 years of services in light of the circular dated 10.03.2017 issued by the State Government and order passed by the Hon’ble Division Bench in case of Smt. Sona Sahu Vs. State of Chhattisgarh vide order dated 28.02.2024.

¶24

10.3 This Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to direct the respondent authorities to grant all benefit of petitioner including the arrears of pay with 18% interest per annum from the date of completion of 10 years of services till the actual payment of Kramonnati Vetanmaan within the stipulated period of 30 days.

¶25

10.4 That, this Hon’ble Court may kindly be pleased to dispose of the instant writ petition with similar order passed in the case of Smt. Sona Sahu Vs. State of Chhattisgarh & Ors. in Writ Appeal No. 261/2023 order passed on 28.02.2024.

¶26

10.5 That, any other relief may also be granted to the petitioner which this Hon’ble Court deemed fit in facts and circumstances of the case.”

¶27

Learned counsel for petitioner submits that petitioner is entitled for Kramonnati Vetanman in terms of decision in case of Sona Sahu Vs. State of Chhattisgarh, in W.A. No. 261 of 2023 , decided on 28.02.2024.

¶28

¶29

Learned State counsel opposes the submission of learned counsel for petitioner and would submit that case of the petitioner is different than that of case of Sona Sahu (Supra) . Petitioner was earlier employee of Panchayat Department and thereafter, he was absorbed in Education Department pursuant to policy decision taken by State Government on 30.06.2018. Petitioner was not appointed as regular Assistant Teachers by School Education Department but was appointed by Janpad Panchayat. Coordinate Bench of this Court has considered the issue with regard to grant of Kramonnati Vetanman to such employee in WPS No.11009 of 2025 and other batch of writ petitions and has dismissed those writ petitions.

¶30

Petitioner upon asking do not dispute the submission of learned State counsel with respect to his initial appointment under Panchayat Department by Janpad Panchayat as also decision in WP(S) No.11009 of 2025 .

¶31

The Coordinate Bench of this Court while considering the batch of writ petitions lead case bearing WPS No. 11009 of 2025 with regard to grant of Kramonnati to petitioners therein, has dismissed the writ petitions and observed thus :-

¶32

“35. Considering the facts of the case that the

¶33

petitioners till absorption in pursuance of the policy dated 30.06.2018 are not teachers of the School Education Department, they were shikshakarmis though their designation has been changed as Assistant Teacher (panchayat), Teacher (panchayat) and Lecturer (panchayat) respectively and they are governed by the separate rules framed under the Panchayat Raj Adhiniyam, 1993, therefore, the petitioners are not fulfilling the criteria as laid down in

¶34

¶35

the circular dated 10.03.2017, the bunch of the writ petitions are liable to be dismissed, accordingly, they are dismissed.”

¶36

Since the facts of the case of petitioner as is identical to the facts of the case in WP(S) No.11009 of 2025 is not disputed, this petition is also dismissed in terms of order passed in WPS No.11009 of 2025 and other connected case decided on 24.11.2025.

¶37

Digitally
SHUBHAM signed by
DEY SHUBHAM
DEY

¶38

Sd/-Sd/- (Parth Prateem Sahu) Judge

¶39

Dey

Kuleshwer Prasad Dewangan v. State of Chhattisgarh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Kuleshwer Prasad Dewangan v. State of Chhattisgarh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Ganesh Prasad Shukla Vs Union of India

Surendra Dongre Vs Smt. Sahla Nigar

Suresh Kumar Bharti Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Subeer Saha Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Mahant Ram Bhagat Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Smt. Shanti Usendi Vs State of Chhattisgarh