1 2025:CGHC:5031 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPS No. 747 of 2025 • Dwarika Prasad Sonwani S/o Sahdev Ram Sonwani Aged About 37 Years Presently Working As Lecturer At Govt. High School, Jirrapara, Block Baderajpur, District Kondagaon (C.G.) ... Petitioner(s) versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Secretary, Department Of School Education, Mantralaya, Mahanadi Bhawan, Atal Nagar Nawa Raipur, District Raipur (C.G.). 2 - Director Directorate Of Public Instruction, Indrawati Bhawan, Atal Nagar Naya Raipur, District Raipur (C.G.). 3 - Joint Director Education Division Bastar (Jagdalpur), District Bastar (C.G.). 4 - District Education Officer Kondagaon, District Kondagaon (C.G.). 5 - Block Education Officer Baderajpur, District Kondagaon (C.G.). Digitally signed by RAGHVENDRA JAT 2 ... Respondent(s) For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Govind Prasad Dewangan, Advocate. For Respondent(s)/State : Ms. Shailja Shukla, Dy. G.A. Hon’ble Mr. Justice Amitendra Kishore Prasad Order on Board 28/01/2025 1. By way of this petition, the petitioner has prayed for following reliefs:- “10.1 That, this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to call for the entire records in relates to the case of the petitioner from the possession of respondents for its kind perusal. 10.2 That, this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to direct the respondents to consider the case of the petitioner for grant of the benefits of pay protection in view of the Finance Instruction No. 41/2018 dated 03.08.2018 by taking into consideration of his previous services. 10.3 That, this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to direct the respondents to grant all the consequential benefits to the petitioner including arrears of pay with interest @ 18% per annum from the date of entitlement 3 till the actual payment. 10.4 That, this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to grant any other relief/relief's in favour of the petitioners, which the Hon'ble Court deemed fit & just in the facts and circumstances of the case, including awarding of the costs to the petitioner.” 2. Brief facts of the case, is that, the petitioner through the instant petition is not challenging any particular order, but is challenging the arbitrary action on the part of the respondents, whereby the respondents authority are not granting the benefits of pay protection to the petitioner despite of the Finance Instruction No. 41/2018 dated 03.08.2018 (Annexure-P/1), wherein the period of previous services of the Govt, employee will be counted for the purpose of grant of pay protection in case of Technical Resignation. The petitioner has joined his present services on the post of Lecturer after giving technical resignation and which was duly accepted by the competent authority and therefore, the petitioner is entitle to get the benefits of pay protection by counting the period of his previous services. The petitioner has made a numbers of efforts and also made a representation to the respondents with a request to grant the benefits of pay protection in view of the Finance Instruction No. 41/2018 dated 03.08.2018 by taking into consideration of his previous services, but no 4 action has been taken despite the repeated request. The petitioner is duly entitled to get the benefits of pay protection in view of the aforesaid instruction, but despite of the clear instruction of the Finance department, same has not been granted to the petitioner till date. It is pertinent to mention here that one of the similar situated person namely Ravikant Sahu has been granted the benefits of pay protection in view of the Finance Instruction No. 41/2018 dated 03.08.2018 by taking into consideration of his previous services. The case of the petitioner is similar to the case of similar situated person namely Ravikant Sahu and, therefore, the petitioner is also entitled to get the same pay protection by counting his previous services in view of the aforesaid instruction. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that he is seeking pay protection as per circular dated 03.08.2018. He further submits that in the similar matter passed in WPS No. 7277/2024, the matter has been decided and the benefit of pay protection has been granted to the petitioner. 4. It has been objected by learned counsel for the respondent/State stating that, if the petitioner has to seek redressal of any grievances he has to file an application before the competent authority and they will decide the same. 5. Taking into consideration the limited grievance of petitioners, 5 present petition at this juncture is disposed of reserving liberty in favour of the petitioner to make fresh representation before Joint Director Education Division Bastar (Jagdalpur) i.e. respondent No. 3 within period of 30 days from today and the concerned authority is directed to decide such representations of petitioner, preferable within period of 90 days from the date of receipt of copy of this order. It is expected that the authority concerned will consider the circular dated 03.08.2018 while deciding representation. 6. It is made clear that this Court has not expressed anything on the merits of the case. 7. With the aforesaid observation and direction, the instant petition stands disposed of. Sd/- (Amitendra Kishore Prasad) Judge Raghu Jat