1 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPS No. 6591 of 2025 1 - Suresh Kumar Sharma S/o Late Dileshwar Das Sharma Aged About 62 Years R/o Sankara, P.S.- Baramkela, Distt.- Sarangarh- Bilaigarh (C.G.) ... Petitioner(s) versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Secretary, Department Of School Education, Mahanadi Bhawan, Naya Raipur, Distt.- Raipur (C.G.) 2 - The Director Directorate Of Public Instructions, Indrawati Bhawan, Naya Raipur, Distt.- Raipur (C.G.) 3 - District Education Officer Sarangarh, Distt.- Sarangarh-Bilaigarh (C.G.) 4 - Block Education Officer Baramkela, Distt.- Sarangarh-Bilaigarh (C.G.) 5 - Joint Director Treasury, Accounts And Pension, Bilaspur, Distt.- Bilaspur (C.G.) 6 - Secretary Department Of Finance, Mahanadi Bhawan, Naya Raipur, Distt.- Raipur (C.G.) ... Respondent(s) For Petitioner (s) : Ms. Akanksha Singh, Advocate. For State : Shri Suyash Dhar, Dy. Govt. Advocate. Hon’ble Shri Justice Ravindra Kumar Agrawal, J Order on Board 07.07. 202 5 1. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is entitled for Kramonnati as per the last circular issued by the Government on 08.08.2018 as he/she has completed 30 years of service. He would further submit that the earlier circulars to grant Kramonnati issued on 19.04.1999, 28.04.2008, 03.10.2008, 11.01.2010 and lastly on 08.08.2008 according to that since the petitioner has completed 30 2 years of service, he/she would be entitled for third time pay-scale. He submits that the issue involved in the present petition has already been considered and decided by this Court in the matter of R.S. Verma Vs. State of Chhattisgarh and Others {W.P. (S) No. 2805/2002 vide judgment and order dated 29.08.2006}. He further submits that the petitioner may be granted liberty to make representation to consider the case of the petitioner in the light of the judgment passed by the Hon'ble Apex Court in the matter of State of Tripura and Others Vs. K.K. Roy, 2004 (9) SCC 65 and the order passed in R.S. Verma (Supra) to which learned counsel for the respondent/State has no objection. 2. Accordingly, as per the liberty sought for by the petitioner, the petitioner is granted liberty to make representation before the concerned authority. It is expected that the competent authority, subject to verification, shall decide the representation of the petitioner as expeditiously as possible in an objective manner preferably within a period of four months from the date of receipt of copy of this order. 3. In view of the above, the petition is disposed of with the aforesaid liberty. Sd/- (Ravindra Kumar Agrawal) Judge inder