1 2025:CGHC:33647 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPS No. 7234 of 2025 1 - Mohammad Farazuddin S/o Sheikh Ahsanuddin Aged About 36 Years R/o 192, Sonthi Sakti, District Janjgir-Champa C.G. 2 - Basant Kumar Patel S/o Late Shashi Bhushan Aged About 40 Years R/o Ward No. 15 Patel Colony, Kharsia, District Raigarh C.G. 3 - Vinod Kumar Rathore S/o Shyam Lal Rathore Aged About 46 Years R/o Ward No. 13, Sadkpara, Tohiladih, District- Janjgir-Champa C.G. 4 - Prakash Kumar Rathore S/o Vijay Rathore Aged About 35 Years R/o 207, Dumarpara, District- Janjgir-Champa C.G. ... Petitioners versus 1 - State of Chhattisgarh Through The Secretary, Water Resources Department Mahanadi Bhawan, Atal Nagar, Raipur C.G. 2 - Engineer In Chief, Water Resources Department Raipur, District- Raipur C.G. 3 - Chief Engineer, Hasdev Kachhar Water Resources Department Bilaspur, District- Bilaspur C.G. 4 - Executive Engineer Water Resource Division Janjgir, District Janjgir-Champa C.G. 5 - Executive Engineer Water Resource Division Raigarh, District Raigarh, Chhattisgarh. 6 - Joint Director, Pension And Kosh Lekha Bilaspur, District Bilaspur C.G. ... Respondents Digitally signed by MOHAMMAD AADIL KHAN 2 (Cause title taken from Case Information System) For Petitioners : Mr. Ayush Kesharwani, Advocate on behalf of Mr. Hemant Kesharwani, Advocate. For Respondents/State : Mr. Vinay Pandey, Deputy Advocate General. Hon'ble Shri Justice Ravindra Kumar Agrawal Order on Board 17-07-2025 Heard. 1. The petitioners have filled this petition seeking the following reliefs:- “10.1 That this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to call for all the records pertaining to the case. 10.2 That, the Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to issue writ/order/direction to the respondent authorities to grant the benefits of higher pay scale to the in service petitioners, revise the pension of the retired petitioners as per the Gazette Notification dated 14.10.1982. 10.3 That, this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to issue writ/order/direction to the respondent authorities to pay arrears of salary and pension to the petitioners. 10.4 That, this Hon’ble Court may kindly be pleased to issue writ/order/direction to the respondent authorities to remove the anomaly occurred in the service of the petitioners. 10.5 That, this Hon’ble Court may kindly be pleased to issue writ/order/direction similar to the order passed on 18.07.2024 in WPS No. 6355/2014 and order dated 13.11.2024 passed in WPS No. 7312/2024 directing the respondent authorities to consider and decide the fresh representation in the light of the gazette notification dated 14.10.1982 expeditiously preferably within a period of six months from the date of receipt/ production of a certified copy of this order. 10.6 That any other relief/order which may be deem fit and just in the facts and circumstances of the case may kindly be granted.” 2. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioners submitted that in similarly situated facts and the question of law, a batch of the writ petition, the leading case of which was Writ Petition (S) No. 2904 of 2005 [Dwarikadas Vaishnav 3 & another Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh (now Chhattisgarh) and others] has been considered and decided by the Coordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated 05.12.2012, in which, the petitioners, in those cases, have been granted liberty to file a fresh representation before competent authority, therefore, this petition may also be disposed of in light of that order directing the respondents-Competent Authority to consider the case of the petitioners for revision of their pay scale in accordance with the Notification dated 14.10.1992 (which was modified subsequently as 14.10.1982) issued by State of Madhya Pradesh, as the petitioners were earlier working as daily wage employee and subsequently, their services were regularized. 3. Learned counsel appearing for the State/respondents would submit that earlier the respondent/State had already considered the issue of the petitioner in the light of the judgment passed by State Administrative Tribunal, Gwalior Bench in Laxmi Narayan Upadhyay v. State of M.P., however, he submits that if the petitioners file fresh representation(s), the State will consider their case in light of the notification as mentioned herein above. 4. In view of the above submissions made by the parties, this petition is disposed of. If the petitioners file fresh representation(s) before the competent authority, the same shall be considered and decided by the competent authority in light of the aforesaid notification expeditiously preferably within a period of six months from the date of receipt/ production of a certified copy of this order. 5. With the aforesaid observation, the writ petition is disposed off. Sd/- (Ravindra Kumar Agrawal) Judge Aadil