Sunita Shende vs The State Of Chhattisgarh 33 ... on 18 March, 2019

[Cites 1, Cited by 1]

Chattisgarh High Court

Sunita Shende vs The State Of Chhattisgarh 33 ... on 18 March, 2019

Bench: P. Sam Koshy

                                                 1
                                                                                     NAFR
                         HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR
                             WRIT PETITION (S) NO.1933 OF 2019
           1. Mrs. Sunita Shende W/o Mr. Rajan Shende Aged About 54 Years By
              Occupation Lecturer Local Body, Govt. HSS Bagodar Block Kanker,
              District U. B. Kanker Chhattisgarh.
                                                                          ...Petitioner(s)
                                              Versus
           1. The State Of Chhattisgarh Through Its Secretary, School Education
              Department, Mantralaya, Naya Raipur District Raipur Chhattisgarh.
           2. Commissioner-Cum-Director Panchayat Sanchanalaya, Naya Raipur
              District Raipur Chhattisgarh.
           3. Chief Executive Officer Zila Panchayat, District U. B. Kanker Chhattisgarh.
           4. Deputy Director Local Fund Audit, Jagdalpur Chhattisgarh.
                                                                    ... Respondent(s)

For Petitioner : Shri Parag Kotecha and Shri Shalvik Tiwari, Advocates.

For Respondent-State : Shri Rahul Mishra, Dy. Govt. Advocate.

Hon'ble Shri Justice P. Sam Koshy Order on Board 18.03.2019

1. The petitioner is aggrieved by the action of the respondents, whereby the increment granted to the petitioner is being withdrawn on the ground that she has not passed B. Ed/D. Ed examination.

2. Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the 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 in the case of Jayant Kumar Patle vs. State of Chhattisgarh (WPS No.4271 of 2017 and batch of petitions, vide order dated 03-11-2017) and various directions have been issued for affording proper opportunity of hearing and then decide the matter.

3. Learned State counsel would submit that the petitioner's claim would be examined after affording opportunity of hearing in terms of order dated 03- 11-2017 passed in the case of Jayant Kumar Patle (supra).

4. Considering the aforesaid submission, this petition is finally disposed off with a direction to the respondents for examination of petitioner's claim in terms of order passed by this Court in the case of Jayant Kumar Patle (supra) and take appropriate decision thereon.

Sd/-

(P. Sam Koshy) Judge inder

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

Chattisgarh High Court