-1- 2025:CGHC:11411 NAFR HIGH COURT of CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPS No. 5264 of 2018 S.M.Seyeda Parvin W/o Mohammad Sirajuddin Aged About 37 Years Ex. District Project Manager, E-Panchayat, Jila Panchayat Jagdalpur, At Present Hostel Superintendent Tribal Department Prematric Girls Hostel Naganar, District Bastar Chhattisgarh., District : Bastar(Jagdalpur), Chhattisgarh ... Petitioner versus 1 - State of Chhattisgarh Through The Secretary, of Panchayat And Rural Department, Mahanadi Bhawan, Mantralaya, New Raipur, District Raipur Chhattisgarh. 2 - The Director, Panchayat, Directorate Mahanadi Bhawan, New Raipur, District Raipur Chhattisgarh. 3 - The Chief Executive officer Zila Panchayat Jagdalpur, District Bastar Chhattisgarh. 4 - The Collector, District Bastar At Jagdalpur, District : Bastar(Jagdalpur), Chhattisgarh. ... Respondent(s) (Cause Title is taken from Case Information System) For Petitioner : Mr. Karan Kumar Bahrani, Advocate For State : Mr. Dashrath Prajapati, Panel Lawyer For Respondent No. 3 : Mr. C. Jayant K. Rao, Advocate Hon'ble Shri Justice Rakesh Mohan Pandey Order on Board 07.03.2025 Digitally signed by NADIM MOHLE -2- 1) The petitioner has filed this petition seeking the following relief(s):- “10.1 That, this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to direct the respondents authorities to pay the petitioner the arrears of the salary at the rate of Rs. 15,000/- per month since 01.04.2016 to 31.03.2017 as per letter dated 13.01.2017 written by respondent no. 1. 10.2 Any other relief which this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper may also be granted in favor of the petitioner together with cost of the petition.” 2) Mr. Karan Kumar Bahrani, learned counsel appearing for the the petitioner would submit that initially, the petitioner was appointed to the post of District Project Manager (e-Panchayat) in the office of respondent No.3 on 30.09.2013 on contract basis on fixed pay of Rs. 15,000/- per month. He would contend that a letter was issued by the Secretary /respondent No.1 dated 13.01.2017, and the services of contractual employees under the Rashtriya Gram Swaraj Abhiyan (for short, RGSA scheme), were continued till 31.03.2017. He would further contend that the salary was fixed to Rs.35,000/- per month. He would contend that the petitioner resigned from services on 01.04.2017, therefore, he is entitled to get salary at the rate of Rs.35,000/- per month from 01.04.2016 to 31.03.2017. 3) On the other hand, C. Jayanat K. Rao, learned counsel appearing for the respondent No.3 would submit that a memo was issued by respondent No.1 on 13.01.2017 with regard to the continuation of the services of the employees appointed under the RGSA scheme. He would submit that salary of District Project Manager was enhanced from Rs. 15,000/- to Rs.35,000/- from 13.01.2017, but date of implementation was not specified; thus, the petitioner is -3- not entitled to claim the benefit extended vide letter dated 13.01.2017. 4) Mr. Dashrath Prajapati, learned Panel Lawyer would support the submission made by Mr. Rao. 5) I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the documents. 6) In the present case, the petitioner who was appointed on the post of District Project Manager on 30.09.2013, resigned from services on 01.07.2017; the salary of the said post was enhanced from Rs.15,000-35,000/- vide letter dated 13.01.2017. The date of implementation of said order was not specified in that letter, but vide Annexure R-3/1, the date of implementation of the said order was 15.03.2017 for newly advertised post. As the petitioner was appointed in the year 2013, therefore, in the opinion of this Court, the petitioner would not derive benefit from letter dated 13.01.2017. Consequently, this petition fails and is hereby dismissed. Sd/- (Rakesh Mohan Pandey) Judge NADIM