Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 1, Cited by 1]

Chattisgarh High Court

Amrita Kunjam vs The State Of Chhattisgarh 28 ... on 5 April, 2019

Author: P. Sam Koshy

Bench: P. Sam Koshy

                                                1
                                                                                      NAFR
                       HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR
                            WRIT PETITION (S) NO.2495 OF 2019
          1. Mrs. Amrita Kunjam W/o Mr. Pawan Kumar Kunjram Aged About 33 Years
             By Occupation Teacher (L.B.) Govt. U.P.S. Amodi, Block Antagarh,
             District Uttar Baster Kanker Chhattisgarh.
                                                                            ...Petitioner(s)
                                             Versus
          1. The State of Chhattisgarh Through Its Secretary, Panchayat And Rural
             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 Uttar Baster Kanker
             Chhattisgarh.
                                                                    ... Respondent(s)

For Petitioner : Shri Shalvik Tiwari, Advocate. For Respondent-State : Shri Anshuman Shrivastava, PL.

Hon'ble Shri Justice P. Sam Koshy Order on Board 05.04.2019

1. Defaults pointed out by the Registry for the moment stands ignored and the matter is heard finally with the consent of the parties.

2. Learned counsel for the parties would submit that the issue raised in this petition is squarely covered by order dated 28.11.2017 passed by this Court in WPS No.2530 of 2017 (Mukesh Kumar Patel and another Vs. State of Chhattisgarh and another) and batch of petitions wherein the circular dated 23.04.2016 has been quashed, petitions allowed and it has been declared that the petitioners therein shall be entitled to obtain the benefit of revised pay-scale on completion of 8 years service by including the services rendered by them on a lower post or on the same post.

3. In view of the aforesaid submission and the impugned order and action is based on circular dated 23.04.2016 which has been quashed in the case referred to herein above, the petition also deserves to be allowed with the direction that the petitioner(s) shall be entitled to obtain the benefit of revised pay-scale on completion of 8 years service by including the services rendered by him / her on a lower post or on the same post.

4. No order as to costs.

Sd/-

(P. Sam Koshy) Judge inder