##PAGE1##

1

Digitally

signed by

SIDDHANT S TAID MD RH AA KN AT R 2026:CGHC:22631

TAMRAKAR Date:

2026.05.15

11:19:57

+0530

NAFR

HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR

WPS No. 4549 of 2022

 Kamta Prasad Sinha S/o Manglu Ram Sinha Aged About 60 Years Presently

Posted And Working As Vaccinator O/o Veterinary Hospital, Palnar, R/o

Ward No. 02, Palnar, Nakulnar, Dantewada, District : Dantewada,

Chhattisgarh

... Petitioner(s)

versus

1. State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Secretary, Department Of Animal

Husbandry And Veterinary Services, Mahanadi Bhavan, Mantralaya, New

Raipur, District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh

2. Director Directorate Of Veterinary Services, Indrawati Bhavan, Ground

Floor, Block-3 Naya Raipur, District - Raipur Chhattisgarh, Police Station -

Naya Raipur, District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh

3. Deputy Director Veterinary Services, Dantewada, Distt.- South Bastar (C.G.)

... Respondent(s)

For Petitioner : Mr. Syed Majid Ali, Advocate

For State : Mr. R.C.S. Deo, Panel Lawyer

Hon'ble Shri Justice Rakesh Mohan Pandey

Order on Board

13.05 .2026

1. By way of this petition, the petitioner has sought the following relief(s):-

“10.1 This Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to

direct the respondent authorities to grant the

benefits of time pay scale in favor of the

petitioners within the stipulated time period.

10.2 This Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to

direct the respondent authorities to take

appropriate decision on the pending

representation of the petitioner within a stipulated

2

time period treating the petitioner in service from

his initial date of appointment.

10.3 That the Hon'ble Court further pleased to

grant such other relief(s) as may be deemed fit

and proper in the interest of justice.”

2. Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner was

appointed in the respondent department as Daily Wager on 24.01.1987. His

services were regularized against post of Vaccinator along with 17 other

employees vide order dated 28.01.1992. Mr. Majid Ali would submit that

according to the circular dated 04.08.2010 issued by Finance Department,

petitioner is entitled for second time bound pay scale after completion of 20

years of service. He would submit that said benefit has already been

extended to 17 similarly situated employees. He would contend that vide

order dated 22.07.2024, the State was directed to verify as to whether

similarly situated persons have been granted benefit of second time bound

pay scale or not. He would submit that in the affidavit, particularly in para 6,

it is categorically stated that similarly placed employees were granted benefit

of second time bound pay scale for which they were not legally entitled and

explanation has been sought from the concerned authority. He would contend

that if similarly situated employees have already been extended second time

bound pay scale, the petitioner is also entitled for similar relief.

3. On the other hand, learned counsel appearing for respondents would oppose.

Mr. Deo would submit that 17 similarly situated employees were extended

benefit of second time bound pay scale erroneously and explanation has been

sought from Director.

4. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the documents

placed on record.

3

5. Taking into consideration the fact that rightly or wrongly benefit of second

time bound pay scale has already been extended to the other employees, the

petitioner cannot be discriminated. Accordingly, this petition is disposed of

with a direction to the respondent authorities to consider the claim of the

petitioner for grant of second time bound pay scale expeditiously, preferably

within a period of 120 days.

6. With the aforesaid observation(s), and direction(s), the instant petition is

hereby disposed of

Sd/-

(Rakesh Mohan Pandey)

JUDGE

$iddhant