1 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPS No. 6366 of 2025 1 - Mrs. Punam Sarita Lakra W/o Mr. Kuldeep Lakra, Aged About 40 Years Post Teacher, (Local Body), Posted At Government Upper Primary School, Chantipali, Block Sarangarh, Distt. Sarangarh-Bhilaigarh (C.G.) ... Petitioner(s) versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Secretary, School Education Department, Mantralaya, Naya Raipur Distt. Raipur (C.G.) 2 - Secretary Panchayat And Rural Development Department, Mantralaya, Naya Raipur Distt. Raipur (C.G.) 3 - Director Panchayat And Rural Development Department, Mantralaya, Naya Raipur, Distt. Raipur (C.G.) 4 - District Education Officer District Sarangarh-Bhilaigarh (C.G.) 5 - Zila Panchayat Sarangarh, Through It Chief Executive Officer, Zila Panchayat District Sarangarh- Bhilaigarh (C.G.) 6 - Janpad Panchayat Sarangarh, Through It Chief Executive Officer, Janpad Panchayat , Sarangarh, District Sarangarh - Bhilaigarh (C.G.) ... Respondent(s) For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Parag Kotecha, Advocate For Respondent(s) : Mr. Santosh Bharat, Panel Lawyer SAGRIKA AGRAWAL Digitally signed by SAGRIKA AGRAWAL Date: 2025.07.17 10:51:25 +0530 2 Hon'ble Shri Justice Ravindra Kumar Agrawal, J. Order on Board 15/07/2025 1. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner became entitled for the revised pay-scale after completion of 8 years of service on 17-06-2013, which is also mentioned in the order dated 07-10-2016, whereby benefit of revised pay-scale is extended to the petitioner, but arrears of the revised pay-scale from 17-06-2013 to 05-12-2018 is not paid. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that as per the notification issued by the State Government dated 17-05-2013, the Teacher (Panchayat) who has completed 8 years of service is entitled for the revised pay scale. The petitioner was extended the benefit of revised pay scale pursuant to the notification dated 17-05-2013, but financial benefit is extended from 17-06-2013 only and not from 18-07-2013. He contended that the issue of considering the period of service in which any of the employees have worked in the lower post are to be considered is decided in WPS No. 2530 of 2017 (Mukesh Kumar Patel and another versus State of Chhattisgarh and another) and the case of the petitioner is covered by the said judgment. 3. He also referred to the order passed by co-ordinate Bench of this Court in case of Avinesh Kumar Namdev and Ors. Vs. State of Chhattisgarh and Ors (WPS No. 5328 of 2021). Counsel for the petitioner submits that as the issue is already considered and decided by this Court, at this stage, grievance of the petitioner would be redressed, if petitioner is permitted to submit representation before respondent No. 5 and in turn, 3 respondent No.5 be directed to consider and decide the representation of petitioner at the earliest for grant of arrears of revised pay scale for the intervening period from 17-06-2013 to 05-12-2018. 4. Learned counsel for the State submits that in view of submission of learned counsel for the petitioner, her representation will be considered and decided by respondent No. 5, at the earliest.Page No.3 5. Considering submissions of learned counsel for the petitioner, this petition is finally disposed of permitting the petitioner to submit a representation before respondent No. 4 to 6, who, in turn, is directed to consider and decide the representation to be submitted by petitioner at the earliest, preferably within a period of 10 weeks from the date of receipt of representation, in accordance with law, subject to verification of the facts, keeping in mind decision rendered in the case of Avinesh Kumar Namdev (supra). 6. With the aforementioned observation and direction, the writ petition stands disposed of. Sd/- (Ravindra Kumar Agrawal) Judge sagrika