1 2025:CGHC:40593 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPS No. 8551 of 2025 1 - Dr. Sushma Patel D/o Rupdhan Patel, Aged About 43 Years Working As Assistant Professor, Kirodimal Government Arts And Science Coiiege, Raigarh, District Raigarh (C.G.) ... Petitioner(s) versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Secretary, Department Of Higher Education Mantralaya, Mahanadi Bhawan, Nava Raipur Atal Nagar, District Raipur (C.G.) 2 - Commissioner, Department Of Higher Education Mantralaya, Indrawati Bhawan, Nava Raipur Atal Nagar, District Raipur (C.G.) 3 - Principal, Kirodimal Government Arts And Science College, Raigarh, District Raigarh (C.G.) ... Respondent(s) For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Vikas Dubey, Advocate For Respondent(s) : Mr. Sabyasachi Choubey, Panel Lawyer Hon'ble Shri Justice Ravindra Kumar Agrawal Order on Board 12/08/2025 1. Grievance of petitioner in this writ petition is of non-granting Academic Grade Pay to petitioner who is holding the post of Assistant Professor (Botany). SAGRIKA AGRAWAL Digitally signed by SAGRIKA AGRAWAL Date: 2025.08.13 10:13:42 +0530 2 2. Learned counsel for petitioner would submit that petitioner was appointed on the post of Assistant Professor (Botany) vide order dated 29.07.2017. Petitioner successfully completed probation period and has been confirmed in the service. According to the order issued by the Higher Education Department of the State Government on 30.03.2010, the Assistant Professors holding the Ph.D. and M.Phil after completion of 04 years and 05 years respectively are entitled for Academic Grade Pay of ₹7000/- and it is to be enhanced further after completion of period prescribed in the order. When petitioner was not given benefit of Academic Grade Pay after completion of relevant time as prescribed in the order dated 30.03.2010, petitioner submitted representation before Respondent No. 1 through proper channel le. Respondent No. 3/ Principal upon receiving the representation forwarded the same on 14.02.2025 before Respondent No. 1, enclosing academic details of petitioner. He submits that claim of petitioner is based on the order issued by the State Government dated 30.03.2010 but even then Respondent No. 1 till date has not taken any decision on the representation submitted by petitioner. 3. On the other hand, learned State counsel submits that according to the submission of learned counsel for petitioner that representation of petitioner has already been forwarded by Respondent No. 3 to Respondent No. 1, if it is not yet decided, it will be decided and appropriate orders will be passed in accordance with law. 4. I have heard learned counsel for the parties. 5. Grievance of petitioner is primarily that he is entitled for the Academic Grade Pay as provided under the order issued by the Higher Education 3 Department of the State Government on 30.10.2010, petitioner submitted representation for grant of Academic Grade Pay which till date is pending consideration. 6. Given the aforementioned facts of the case, instead of keeping this writ petition pending and seeking reply from the Respondents, it will be in the interest of the parties, if the petition is dispose of directing the Respondent No. 1 to consider and decide the representation of petitioner dated 14.02.2025 forwarded through Respondent No. 3, expeditiously. 7. Accordingly, writ petition is disposed of directing Respondent No. 1 to take decision on the claim of petitioner pursuant to the representation submitted by him on 04.11.2022, expeditiously within a further period of four weeks from the date of receipt of copy of order passed by this court. 8. With the aforesaid observation and direction, writ petition is finally disposed of. Sd/- (Ravindra Kumar Agrawal) Judge sagrika