1 2025:CGHC:7721 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPS No. 7578 of 2018 1 - Smt. Annpurna Jaiswal W/o Shri Krishna Kumar Jaiswal Aged About 51 Years Presently Posted As Assistant Teacher (L.B.) At Government Primary School Thakurdeva, Mungeli, R/o Village Padmpur, Tahsil Mungeli, District - Mungeli, Chhattisgarh., District : Mungeli, Chhattisgarh ... Petitioner versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through Its Secretary, School Education Department Mantralaya, Mahanadi Bhawan, Naya Raipur, District - Raipur, Chhattisgarh. 2 - District Education Officer Mungeli, District - Mungeli, Chhattisgarh. 3 - Chief Executive Officer Janpad Panchayat Mungeli, District - Mungeli, Chhattisgarh. 4 - Block Education Officer Mungeli, District - Mungeli, Chhattisgarh. ---- Respondents For Petitioner : Shri Abhyuday Tripathi, Advocate holding the brief of Shri Mateen Siddiqui, Advocate. For Respondent/ State : Shri Prateek Tiwari, P.L. Hon'ble Shri Justice Rakesh Mohan Pandey Order on Board 13.02.2025 1. The petitioner has filed this petition seeking the following reliefs: “10.1) That, the Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to direct the respondents to grant the benefit fo pay-scale already been granted to the petitioner. 10.2) That, the Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to direct the respondent authorities, to pay back the Digitally signed by SMT NIRMALA RAO -2- different of reduced amount with an appropriate interest from September 2018 to uptill now. 10.3) That, any other relief(s) which the Hon'ble Court deems fit and proper may also kindly be granted in favour of the petitioner.” 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner may be permitted to make a representation before the respondent authorities, claiming the upgraded pay-scale granted earlier vide order dated 2.11.2011. 3. On the other hand, learned counsel for the State would submit that the benefit of upgraded pay-scale granted earlier was recalled vide order dated 14.11.2014. Therefore, no case is made out for interference. 4. Heard the learned counsel for the parties and perused the documents present on the record. 5. Taking into consideration the limited grievance raised by counsel for the petitioner, this petition is disposed of reserving liberty in favour of the petitioner to make a representation before the appropriate authority. The concerned authority is directed to consider the representation so made in an objective manner, preferably, within a period of 120 days. It is made clear that this Court has not expressed any opinion on the merits of the case. 6. With the aforesaid observation(s), this petition is disposed of. Sd/- (Rakesh Mohan Pandey) Judge Nimmi