SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2026 Supreme(Online)(Chh) 2531

IN THE HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR
STATE OF CHHATTISGARH – Appellant
Versus
SMT. MANJULA SHUKLA – Respondent
WA/323/2024



2026:CGHC:7296-DB Digitally signed by SAGRIKA SAGRIKA AGRAWAL AGRAWAL Date:

2026.02.12

10:16:07 +0530 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WA No. 323 of 2024

1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Secretary, Higher Education Department, Mantralaya New Raipur, P.S. Rakhi, District Raipur Chhattisarh, Chhattisgarh

2 - The Commissioner, Higher Education Directorate, Chhattisgarh, Raipur Chhattisgarh, ... appellant (s)

versus

1 - Smt. Manjula Shukla W/o. Late Hari Dutta Shukla Aged About 59 Years R/o 841, Sunder Nagar Raipur, Police Staiton Deendayal Nagar, District Raipur Chhattisgarh, 2 - Chhattisgarh Kalyan Society, Through The Chairman, Kalyan Post Graduate College, Bhilai Nagar, Durg Chhattisgarh

3 - The Principal, Kalyan Post Graduate College, Bhilai, Nagar Durg Chhattisgarh, ... Respondent(s)

For appellants/ State : Mr. Praveen Das. Addl. Advocate General For Respondent No. 1 : Mr. Prateek Sharma, Advocate For Res. No. 2 & 3 : Mr. Siddharth Tiwari, Advocate Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Hon’ble Shri Ravindra Kumar Agrawal, Judge

Order on Board

Per Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice

10.02.2026

1. Heard Mr. Praveen Das, Addl. Advocate General, appearing for the appellants/ State as well as Mr. Prateek Sharma, learned counsel for the Respondent No. 1 (Petitioner in WPS No. 4708/2016) and Mr. Siddharth Tiwari, learned counsel for the Respondent No. 2 and 3.

2. This appeal has been filed by the appellants/ State, who are the respondent No. 1 & 2 in WPS No. 4708/2016, against the order dated 19.12.2023 passed by learned Single Bench of this Hon’ble Court in WPS No. 4708/2016 whereby the writ petition filed by the writ petitioner (respondent herein), has been allowed.

3. Brief facts of the case, as projected by the Respondent No. 1, are that on 14.08.1988 (Annexure P/2) the Respondent No. 1 was appointed as Assistant Librarian in the respondent/College against the regular vacant post in the pay scale of Rs. 575. 800/- and since then the Respondent No. 1 is discharging her duties. The pay scale of Rs. 575-800/- granted to the Respondent No. 1 was upgraded from time to time in pay scale of Rs. 950 in the year 1990, 1150-1800 in the year 1991 and finally vide order dated 23.12.2006, the pay scale of Rs. 1740-3000/- of University Grants Commission was granted to the Respondent No. 1 with effect from the date of appointment i.e. 16.08.1988, applying & in compliance of order dated 16.10.1990 of State and the same is in accordance with Fifth Pay Commission. According to the Respondent No. 1, she is entitled for the pay scale of Rs.2200- 4000/- in accordance with scheme of University Grants Commission and order dated 16.10.1990 of State Government, from the date of her initial appointment i.e. 16.08.1988, as she fulfills the qualification and eligibility prescribed for the post of Librarian from the date of her appointment, having qualification of B.Lib. with more than 50% and M. Lib. with more than 55% and she would have been upgraded with the Sixth Pay Scale also. According to the Respondent No. 1, identically placed Assistant Librarian namely Smt. Usha Tiwari has been granted pay scale of Librarian of Rs. 2200-4000/- from the date of her eligibility i.e. 12.06.1987 though worked till 18.10.2006 as Assistant Librarian. Further, the other similarly placed Assistant Librarians namely Anila Sharma and Anita Saxena have also been granted the pay scale of Rs. 2200-4000/-. The Respondent No. 1 is also getting the pay scale of Rs. 1740-3000 applying order dated 16.10.1990 issued by the respondent State but for applying pay scale of Rs. 2200-4000 of the same order dated 16.10.1990, claim of Respondent No.1 is dismissed on the ground that the respondent/college is a private college. According to the Respondent No. 1, since she was eligible and qualified for the post of Librarian right from the date of her appointment, therefore, a letter dated 18.08.2004 (Annexure P/8) was issued by the Respondent No. 2 to the respondent College for sending propo

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top