1 2025:CGHC:8068 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPS No. 5441 of 2014 Order Reserved on : 14.01.2025 Order Passed on : 14.02.2025 Bhimsen Mishra, S/o. Late Lalman Mishra, aged about 40 years, R/o Village Barora, Tahsil Marwahi, District Bilaspur (C.G.) ---- Petitioner Versus 1. State of Chhattisgarh Through- Secretary, Panchayat & Gramin Vikas Mantralaya, Mantralaya Mahanadi Bhawan, Raipur (C.G.) 2. Additional Collector Pendra Road, Bilaspur (C.G.) 3. Chief Executive Officer Janpad Panchayat, Village Marwahi, District Bilaspur (C.G.) 4. Secretary Gram Panchayat Barora, P.O. Bagrar, Tahsil Marwahi, District Bilaspur (C.G.) ---- Respondents ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- For Petitioner Mr. B.P.Singh, Advocate. For Respondents No. 1 & 2/State Mr. Devesh Kela, PL. For Respondents No. 3 Ms. Chetna Sharma, on behalf of Mr. R.S. Baghel, Advocate. For Respondent No. 4 None. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Hon’ble Smt. Justice Rajani Dubey C A V Order 2 1. The petitioner has preferred the present writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India against the respondent authorities whereby the respondents have not been paying salary of the petitioner since dated 15/09/2003 who was working as Guruji and subsequently as Shiksha Karmi Grade-III and also the respondents have been arbitrarily and illegally restraining the petitioner from continuing his duties. 2. Brief facts of the case, as adumbrated by the petitioner, are that the petitioner has filed the instant petition on the grounds that the petitioner had been appointed as Guruji at EGS School Chingitola, Barora vide order dated 15.09.2003 (Annexure P/1), subsequently the scheme under which the petitioner was appointed was abolished and finally had been absorbed as Shiksha Karmi. The respondent No. 4 issued order of posting vide order dated 12.02.2004 (Annexure P/3) in pursuance of order dated 15.09.2003. Despite discharging his duties as Shiksha Karmi the salary of the petitioner was not being paid to him. Thereafter, applications have been made before the learned Additional Collector (Pendra Road) on 31/01/2007 and 29/07/2012, wherein the Additional Collector directed the respondent no. 3 to make payment of salary, but the compliance of the same has not been committed. Thereafter, without any show cause notice or termination order the petitioner had been restrained from continuing his duties. Hence, this petition filed by the petitioner seeking for the following reliefs:- “I. That, this Hon’ble Court may kindly be pleased to direct the respondents to make payment of the salary of the petitioner from the date of his appointment till date. II. That, this Hon’ble Court may kindly be pleased to direct the respondents to permit the petitioner to continue to work on his appointed post. 3 III. Any other relief/relief’s, which this Hon’ble Court may think fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case, with cost of the petition, may also please be granted to the petitioner. 3. Learned Counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is entitled to receive the salary for the period for which he has been discharging his duties as Teacher/Shiksha Karmi-III. The respondents are withholding the salary of the petitioner for the last 10 years just to harass the petitioner. Due to non payment of salary, the petitioner is facing acute financial hardship and he is not able to support his family. The respondents have restrained the petitioner from working after 30.04.2013 which is arbitrary, illegal and unconstitutional. No notice was ever served on the petitioner by the respondents before restraining him from work and no opportunity of hearing was afforded to the petitioner before stopping him from working as Shiksha Karmi. As such, the respondents are directed to permit the petitioner to work on his appointed post and the respondents are directed to make payment of the salary of the petitioner from the date of his appointment till today. 4. Learned counsel for respondents No. 1 & 2 strongly opposes the prayer of the petitioner and submits that the petitioner was appointed by the order of respondent No. 4 on 12.02.2004 and that too for the education session 2003-2004 only. The respondents No. 1 & 2 have not issued any order of appointment and they are not liable to make payment of any salary. If any appointment has been made, it has been made by the respondent No. 4 Gram Panchayat and it is their duty to arrange for payment of honorarium or salary whatsoever. The petitioner has filed earlier writ petition i.e., WP No. 1156 of 2006 which was 4 withdrawn on 08.03.2006 with liberty to file separate petition, but the instant petition has been filed in the year 2014 and the respondents No. 1 & 2 not have any record of the petitioner working on the post of Guruji or Shiksha Karmi-III. EGS scheme i.e., the Education Guarantee Scheme has already been discontinued and stopped. The petitioner has not filed any document showing his absorption as Shiskha Karmi Grade III issued by the Janpad Panchayat under the EGS scheme, the concerned Panchayats were allowed to appoint Guruji on the local need basis from the local available sources under Sarva Shiksha Abhiyan (SSA). The regular Shiksha Karmi Grade III has already been appointed in the Primary School, Chingitola and is working there. Hence, there being no merit in the petition, it is liable to be dismissed. 5. Learned counsel for respondent No. 3 submits that the petitioner was appointed by the order of respondent No. 4 on 12.02.2004 and that too for the education session 2003-2004 only. The answering respondent i.e., respondent No. 4 has not issued any order appointing the petitioner on the post of Guruji. Hence, respondent No. 4 is not liable to make payment of any salary. If any appointment has been made, it has been made by the respondent No. 4 Gram Panchayat and it is their duty to arrange for payment of honorarium or salary whatsoever. The direction dated 29.09.2003 only contemplates about appointment of those Guruji as Contract Shiksha Karmi Grade III, who possess the necessary qualification. The appointment was to be made under the Chhattisgarh Panchayat Shala Samvida Shikshak (Bharti Tatha Sewa Sharten) Niyam, 2001. As such, from the direction itself, it is clear that there was no direction for absorption as ShikshaKarmi, it was for contractual Shiksha Karmi only. As per the appointment order of the 5 petitioner, the petitioner was appointed by the Gram Panchayat i.e., the respondent no. 4 for education session 2003-2004 only and that period is already over. The appointment was never made by respondent No. 3. So, this petition is without any merit and liable to be dismissed. 6. No one appeared on behalf of respondent No. 4, despite service of notice. 7. Heard both the counsel for the parties and perused the material available on record including the impugned order. 8. It is not disputed in this case that the petitioner was appointed by order dated 12.02.2004 (Annexure P/03) on the post of Dwitiya Guruji under the EGS scheme for Academic Session 2003-2004. 9. The petitioner filed Annexure P-07, certificate of Principal Primary School Chingitola in this regard that he is teaching since 16.02.2004 to 30.04.2013. As per Annexure P-03, it is clear that this appointment was contractual appointment and it is held in condition “6” which is reproduced herein for ready reference as under:- 6- bu fu;eksa ds rgr f}rh; xq:th dh fu;qfDr f'k{kk l= 2003&04 ds fy, dh tk jgh gSA 10. The respondents No. 1, 2 & 3 have stated that they never appointed the petitioner and EGS scheme is now discontinued, but as per certificate Annexure P-07, the petitioner was teaching since 16.02.2004 to 30.04.2013. The respondents No. 1, 2 & 3 have objected on this ground that if respondent No. 4 Gram Panchayat appointed the petitioner, then it is the duty of respondent No. 4 to give honorarium or salary of the petitioner, however respondent No. 4 did not appear 6 before this Court. The petitioner did not file any order in this regard that his services were ever absorbed in the department as Shiksha Karmi Grade III. The petitioner also filed order dated 31.01.2007 which is the order of Additional Collector, Pendra Road. The learned competent authority in the similar matter directed the Janpad Panchayat Marwahi to pay the salary of the applicant Ganesh Singh as he is working since 2004. 11. It is clear from Annexure P-03 that the petitioner was appointed only for one session, but as per Annexure P-07 certificate of Principal, he is working for 09 years, so it is directed to respondent No. 4 to enquire the service period of the petitioner and if it is found that the petitioner is working as Teacher in his School as per certificate Annexure P-07 since 16.02.2004 to 30.04.2013, then his payment is calculated and the respondent No. 4 shall pay his salary within 03 months. 12. As an upshot with the aforesaid direction, this petition stands disposed of. Sd/- (Rajani Dubey) Judge Uttej