NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR W.P.(S) No. 8665 of 2022 Rambilas Gajraj S/o Manrakhan Gajraj Aged About 40 Years Assistant Teacher (Lb), Government Primary School Khairbana, Block Sahaspur-

Lohara District Kabirdham Chhattisgarh.

---- Petitioner Versus

1. State Of Chhattisgarh Through Its Secretary School Education Department, Mantralaya, Bhawan, Naya Raipur, Raipur Chhattisgarh

2. Deputy Secretary, School Education Department, Mantralaya, Bhawan, Naya Raipur, Chhattisgarh

3. Director Directorate Of Public Instructions Indrawati Bhawan 3rd Floor, Raipur District Raipur Chhattisgarh

4. Divisional Joint Director, Durg Division, Durg Chhattisgarh.

5. District Education Officer, Kabirdham, District Kabirdham Chhattisgarh.

---- Respondents For Petitioner : Mr. Mateen Siddiqui, Advocate For Respondents/State : Mr. Anshuman Shrivastava, P.L.

Hon'ble Shri Justice Parth Prateem Sahu

Order On Board

08/12/2022

1. Learned counsel for petitioner submits that petitioner was initially appointed on the post of Shiksha Karmi Grade-III in Office of Janpad Panchayat, Sahaspur Lohara, District Kabirdham and posted at Government Middle School Ranjitpur, Janpad Panchahat- Sahaspur Lohara, District – Kabirdham. Petitioner while in service participated in the selection process of Shikshakarmi Grade-III conducted by Janpad Panchayat, Sahaspur Lohara (same Janpad Panchayat) and got selected as Shikshakarmi Grade-III (Science) on 11.06.2010. Seniority of petitioner has been fixed considering his date of appointment as 11.06.2010. He contended that Department of Panchayat issued notification in the year 2013 and 2016 considering the period of service, which employee have completed in the earlier post prior to joining of new post is also be considered for revised pay scale. It is also held in case of (Mukesh Kumar Patel and another versus State of Chhattisgarh and another) therefore, petitioner is entitled for benefit of his past service, which he rendered since the date of his first appointment from 08.07.2008. He contended that at this stage petitioner may be permitted to submit fresh detailed representation before respondent No.5 and respondent No.5 be directed to consider and decide the same at the earliest within specified time.

2. Learned State counsel submits that he is having no objection to the limited prayer made by learned counsel for petitioner for decision of his representation.

3. Considering the limited prayer made by learned counsel for petitioner, this petition is disposed off permitting petitioner to submit representation before respondent No.5 raising all his grievance and if such representation is submitted by petitioner, respondent No.5 shall consider and decide the same expeditiously within a period of three months from the date of receipt of representation in accordance with law keeping in mind order passed in Mukesh Kumar Patel and another (supra).

4. With the aforesaid observation and directions, this petition is disposed off.

C.C. as per rules.

Sd/-

(Parth Prateem Sahu)

Judge Balram