1 2025:CGHC:31189 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPS No. 6639 of 2025 1 - Govind Prasad S/o Patanga Prasad Aged About 69 Years R/o Parsada, Post Chakarbhata, Tehsil And District Bilaspur Chhattisgarh ... Petitioner(s) versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through Secretary, Public Works Department, Mantralaya, Nava Raipur, Atal Nagar, District Raipur Chhattisgarh 2 - Superintend Engineer, Public Works Department, Bilaspur Chhattisgarh 3 - Executive Engineer, Public Works Department, Division No. 1, Bilaspur Chhattisgarh 4 - Sub Divisional Officer, Public Works Department, Sub Division No. 1, Bilaspur Chhattisgarh ... Respondent(s) For Petitioner(s) : Mr. K. P. S. Gandhi, Advocate. For Respondent(s) : Ms. Smita Jha, Panel Lawyer. Hon’ble Shri Justice Ravindra Kumar Agrawal, J Order on Board 08/07/2025 1. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that the petitioner was appointed with the respondent department in the year of 1975. He was regularized and retired in the year of 2019. He submits that the petitioner has not been granted any time bound pay scale for which the petitioner is entitled. He would further submits that this writ petition may 2 be disposed of permitting the petitioner to make a detailed representation to respondents No. 4/competent authority for the grievances projected in the writ petition, respondents No. 4/competent authority may be directed to consider and decide the same within the reasonable period of time in accordance with the relevant rules and law applicable to the case of petitioner. 2. Learned counsel appearing for the respondent/State submits that he does not appear to fulfil the eligibility criteria for awarding of time bound pay scale. 3. Be that as it may, after considering the submissions made by the both the parties at bar and on perusal of the documents available on record, at this stage, this Court is inclined to dispose of this petition, permitting the petitioner to make a detailed representation before the respondent No.4/competent authority projecting all his grievances as projected in this writ petition along with the copy of petition within 30 days from the date of receipt of copy of this order and in turn respondent Nos. 4/competent authority is expected to consider and decide the same within the period of 120 days from submission of such representation in accordance with the relevant rules and law applicable to the case of petitioner. 4. This Court does not express anything on the merits of this case. 5. Accordingly, this petition is disposed of with the aforesaid observations and directions. 6. Certified Copy as per rules. Sd/- (Ravindra Kumar Agrawal) Judge Alok