Raghvendra Sharma Vs Indian Institute of Technology — Chhattisgarh HC (2026) — LawSathi Research

Raghvendra Sharma Vs Indian Institute of Technology — Chhattisgarh HC (2026) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Direction to the competent authority/respondent No.1 to consider and take a final decision on the petitioner's representation dated 05.09.2022 (Annexure P/3), if not already finally decided, by passing a reasoned and speaking order in accordance with law, expeditiously.

Issue for consideration

Whether the respondents/competent authority should be directed to consider and take a final decision on the petitioner's representation dated 05.09.2022 (Annexure P/3) claiming 7th Central Pay Commission benefits, including Pay Level-7 and consequential allowances, in accordance with law.

Court's answer

Without expressing any opinion on the merits of the petitioner's claims, the writ petition is disposed of with a direction to the competent authority/respondent No.1 to consider and take a final decision on the petitioner's representation dated 05.09.2022 (Annexure P/3), if not already finally decided, by passing a reasoned and speaking order in accordance with law, and to complete the exercise expeditiously.

Key takeaways

The Court expressly clarified that it has not expressed any opinion on the merits of the petitioner's entitlement to Pay Level-7, Nursing Allowance, Dress Allowance, Risk Allowance, Qualification Pay or any other consequential benefits, and the competent authority shall take an independent decision strictly in accordance with law.obiter¶25

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Service matter (WPS No. 4502 of 2026, High Court of Chhattisgarh, Bilaspur, decided 17.06.2026 by Justice Bibhu Datta Guru): Petitioner, a Staff Nurse claiming benefits of the 7th Central Pay Commission recommendations including Pay Level-7, Nursing Allowance, Dress Allowance, Risk Allowance and Qualification Pay, had submitted a representation dated 05.09.2022 (Annexure P/3); a communication dated 06.09.2022 was contended not to be a final decision. Counsel confined the prayer to a direction to decide the representation. The Court, without expressing any opinion on the merits, disposed of the petition directing the competent authority/respondent No.1 (IIT Bhilai) to take a final decision on the representation, if not already finally decided, by a reasoned and speaking order in accordance with law, expeditiously.

1

2026:CGHC:24325

NAFR

RAHUL JHA

Digitally signed by RAHUL JHA Date: 2026.06.17 17:38:13 +0530

HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR

WPS No. 4502 of 2026

Raghvendra Sharma S/o Mahesh Sharma Aged About 35 Years R/o Street No. 21, Sanatan Nagar, Kohka, Bhilai (C.G.)

Petitioner(s)

Versus

1 - Indian Institute Of Technology Bhilai (I I T Bhilai) Through Its Director At Village Kutelabhata Bhilai, District- Durg (C.G.)

2 - Union Of India Through- Its Secretary, Ministry Of Education Department Of Higher Education, New Delhi

Respondent(s)

(Cause-title taken from Case Information System)

For Petitioner(s)	: Mr. Ravish Verma, Advocate
For Resp No. 1	: Dr. Shiv Kumar Shrivastava, Advocate
For Resp No. 2	; Mr. R.K. Mishra, DSGI

Hon'ble Shri Justice Bibhu Datta Guru

Order on Board

17/06/2026

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is working as a Staff Nurse in respondent No.2-Institute and has been claiming benefits arising out of the recommendations of the 7th Central Pay Commission, including grant of Pay Level-7 and other consequential

2

benefits. It is submitted that in this regard, the petitioner submitted a representation dated 05.09.2022 (Annexure P/3) before the competent authority. It is further submitted that although a communication dated 06.09.2022 was issued by the respondents, the same does not amount to a final decision on the petitioner's claim and the issues raised in the representation are yet to be considered by the competent authority. Learned counsel confines his prayer to a direction to the respondents to consider and take a final decision on the aforesaid representation in accordance with law.

Per contra, learned counsel appearing for the respondents submits that if the petitioner's representation is still pending consideration, the same shall be considered and decided by the competent authority in accordance with law within a reasonable period.

Heard learned counsel for the parties.

Considering the limited prayer made by learned counsel for the petitioner and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the claims raised by the petitioner, the present petition is disposed of with a direction to the competent authority/respondent No.1 to consider and take a final decision on the petitioner's representation dated 05.09.2022 (Annexure P/3), if not already finally decided, by passing a reasoned and speaking order in accordance with law. The aforesaid exercise shall be completed expeditiously.

It is made clear that this Court has not expressed any opinion on the merits of the petitioner's entitlement to Pay Level-7, Nursing Allowance,

3

Dress Allowance, Risk Allowance, Qualification Pay or any other consequential benefits, and the competent authority shall take an independent decision strictly in accordance with law.

With the aforesaid observations and directions, the writ petition stands disposed of.

Sd/- (Bibhu Datta Guru) Judge

Rahul