Hemant Kumar Suryavanshi vs State Of Chhattisgarh 48 Wps/6970/2018 ... on 24 October, 2018

[Cites 1, Cited by 8]

Chattisgarh High Court

Hemant Kumar Suryavanshi vs State Of Chhattisgarh 48 Wps/6970/2018 ... on 24 October, 2018

Bench: P. Sam Koshy

                                             1

                                                                               NAFR
                 HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR

                                 WPS No. 6974 of 2018

             Hemant Kumar Suryawanshi S/o Shri S.R.Suryavanshi, aged about 40
             years, Presently working as Lecturer Panchayat at Govt. Higher
             Secondary School, Pasid, Block Bilha, District Bilaspur (C.G.).
                                                                      ---Petitioner
                                            Versus
       1. State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Secretary, Department Of
          Panchayat And Rural Development, Mahanadi Bhawan, Mantralaya,
          Naya Raipur, District Raipur Chhattisgarh.
       2. Commissioner-cum-Director, Directorate of Panchayat, Naya Raipur,
          District Raipur (C.G.).
       3. Chief Executive Officer, Zila Panchayat, Bilaspur, District Bilaspur
          (C.G.).
                                                                  ---Respondents

For petitioner : Shri C.J.K.Rao, Advocate.

      For State          :      Shri Syed Majid Ali, Dy.G.A.



                         Hon'ble Shri Justice P. Sam Koshy
                                    Order on Board
24/10/2018

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The Petitioner is aggrieved by the action of the Respondents, whereby the increment granted to the Petitioner is being withdrawn on the ground that he/she has not passed B.Ed/D. Ed examination.

2. Learned Counsel for the Petitioner submits 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 the case of Jayant Kumar Patle v. State of Chhattisgarh (WPS No.4271 of 2017 and batch of petitions, vide order dated 03.11.2017) and various directions have been 2 issued for affording proper opportunity of hearing and then decide the matter.

3. Learned Counsel for the State submits 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 of, 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.

5. The writ petition stands accordingly disposed of.

Sd/-


                                                            (P. Sam Koshy)
Sumit                                                           JUDGE

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

Chattisgarh High Court