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) 10249

IN THE HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR
DR. ALPANA DESHPANDE – Appellant
Versus
STATE OF CHHATTISGARH – Respondent
WPS/2918/2026



##PAGE1##

1 / 4

2026:CGHC:14983

NAFR

HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR

WPS No. 2918 of 2026

1 - Dr. Alpana Deshpande W/o Arvind Deshpande Aged About 59 Years Presently Working On The Post Of Assistant Professor At Dr. Khubchand Baghel Government Post Graduate College, Bhilai- 3, District Durg,

Chhattisgarh

2 - Nivedita Mukharjee W/o Dr. Tapas Mukharjee Aged About 62 Years Presently Working On The Post Of Assistant Professor At Government

Naveen College, Risali, Bhilai, District Durg, Chhattisgarh ... Petitioner(s)

Versus

1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Secretary, Department Of Higher Education, Mahanadi Mantralaya, Atal Nagar, Naya Raipur, District Raipur,

Chhattisgarh

2 - The Additional Secretary Department Of Higher Education, Mahanadi Mantralaya, Atal Nagar, Naya Raipur, District Raipur, Chhattisgarh

3 - Principal Secretary Department Of General Administration, Mahanadi Mantralaya, Naya Raipur, District Raipur, Chhattisgarh

4 - Principal Secretary Department Of Finance, Mahanadi Mantralaya, Naya Raipur, District Raipur, Chhattisgarh

5 - Commissioner Department Of Higher Education, Government Of Chhattisgarh, Block- 3, Indravati Bhawan, Naya Raipur, District Raipur,

Chhattisgarh

6 - Principal Dr. Khubchand Baghel Government Post Graduate College, Bhilai-3, District Durg, Chhattisgarh

7 - Principal Government Naveen College, Risali, Bhilai, District Durg, Chhattisgarh

... Respondent(s)

##PAGE2##

2 / 4

For Petitioner : Mr. Himanshu Yadu, Advocate For Respondents : Mr. Ajay Kumrani, P.L. HON'BLE SHRI PARTH PRATEEM SAHU, JUDGE

ORDER ON BOARD

01.04.2026

1. Petitioners have filed this writ petition seeking following reliefs:

“10.1 The Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to direct the respondents to grant the benefits of senior grade pay scale and selection grade pay scale by counting the services of petitioners from the date of initial emergency appointment and re-fixation of pay and release of arrears of the difference amount along with interest @ 12% per annum from the date it

became due till the date of actual payment.

10.2 To issue a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order or direction, directing the respondents to consider and decide the representation (Annexure P/5) of the petitioners for grant of Senior Grade Pay Scale and Selection Grade Pay Scale by counting the past services from the date of initial emergency appointment, in accordance with law and in light of the judgment of this Hon'ble Court dated 06.01.2023 in WPS No. 8375 of 2018 (Dr. Deepak Kumar Shukla & Ors. v. State of Chhattisgarh & Ors.) and the catena of judgments of the Hon'ble Supreme Court and High Courts on the identical issue, within a stipulated time frame as this Hon'ble Court may

deem fit and proper.

10.3 To grant any other relief, which this Hon'ble Court deems fit in the facts and circumstances of the case along with costs

of the petition.”

2. Counsel for petitioners submits that the petitioners were initially

engaged as Assistant Professors on Emergency Basis in the year 1988. Subsequently, looking to the continuously engagement of the petitioner, they were regularized on their post vide order dated

##PAGE3##

3 / 4

05.02.2008, however, petitioners were not extended the benefit of prefixation of pay, senior grade-pay and selection grade pay, counting their past services also. It is contention of counsel for the petitioner that similarly placed petitioners have earlier filed writ petition being WPS No. 8375 of 2018 which was partly allowed and case of the petitioner is squarely covered with the said decision. He also contended that petitioners have submitted representation vide Annexure-P/4 which is also not considered and therefore, direction be issued to the respondent No. 5 to consider and take decision on the representation,

at the earliest, within specified time frame.

3. Counsel for the State submits that in view of the limited prayer made

by counsel for the Petitioner, he is having no objection.

4. Case of the petitioner is that, the petitioners were in

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