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 0, Cited by 2]

Chattisgarh High Court

Smt. Sangeeta Sahu vs State Of Chhattisgarh 39 Wp/2210/2003 ... on 18 February, 2019

Author: P. Sam Koshy

Bench: P. Sam Koshy

                                         1
                                                                                  NAFR
                HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR
                    WRIT PETITION (S) NO. 1032 OF 2019
       Smt. Sangeeta Sahu W/o Ashok Kumar Sahu Aged About 32 Years
       Presently Working As Assistant Teacher (L B) At Govt. Primary School,
       Rengakathera, Block Dongargaon, District Rajnandgaon Chhattisgarh.
                                                                        ---- Petitioner
                                       Versus
   1. State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Secretary, Education
      Department Mantralaya Mahanadi Bhawan, Atal Nagar Raipur,
      District Raipur, Chhattisgarh.
   2. The Secretary Department Of Panchayat And Rural Development,
      Mantralaya, Mahanadi Bhawan, Atal Nagar Raipur, District Raipur
      Chhattisgarh.
   3. District Education Officer Rajnandgaon, District Rajnandgaon
      Chhattisgarh.
   4. Chief Executive Officer Zila Panchayat, Rajnandgaon, District
      Rajnandgaon Chhattisgarh.
   5. Block Education Officer Block Dongargaon, District Rajnandgaon
      Chhattisgarh.
                                                                ... Respondent(s)

For Petitioners : Shri CJK Rao, Advocate. For Respondents : Shri Rahul Mishra Dy. G. A. Hon'ble Shri Justice P. Sam Koshy Order on Board 18.02.2019

1. Challenge in this petition is that though the petitioner was initially appointed as Shiksha Karmi Grade-III and has subsequently been absorbed to the Education Department, she has by now completed 10 years of service and therefore she is entitled for the benefit of Karminnati as per rules governing the field, however, the respondents till date have not granted the said benefit to the petitioner.

2. Given the limited grievance which the petitioner has raised, let the petitioner make a suitable representation to the respondents No.3&4 within a period of three weeks from the date of receipt of certified copy 2 of this order and the respondents No.3&4, in turn, shall take a decision on the granting of Kramonnati to the petitioner within a further period of 90 days.

3. The writ petition accordingly stands disposed of.

Sd/-

(P. Sam Koshy) Judge Jyotij