Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Chhattisgarh · body

2025 DAILYLAW 5804 (CHH)

Dhaniram Chaudhri v. State Of Chhattisgarh

WPS/5231/2017 · 2025-09-11

Shri Rakesh Mohan Pandey

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

1 2025:CGHC:46784 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPS No. 5231 of 2017 1 - Dhaniram Chaudhri S/o Pareshwar, Aged About 43 Years R/o Village Janjgir, Post Aamgaon, Police Station Tamnar, District Raigarh Chhattisgarh., Chhattisgarh 2 - Ajay Kumar S/o Tangu Ram, Aged About 41 Years R/o Saraipani, Post Saraipani, Police Station Bagicha, District Jashpur Chhattisgarh., District : Jashpur, Chhattisgarh 3 - Yudhisthir Ram Yadav S/o Harihar Ram, Aged About 34 Years R/o Village Dhedhetangar, Post Baragjor, Police Station Kunkuri, District Jashpur Chhattisgarh., District : Jashpur, Chhattisgarh 4 - Amrut Ram S/o Sagan Ram, Aged About 35 Years R/o Village Manora, Post Manora, Police Station Manora, District Jashpur Chhattisgarh., District : Jashpur, Chhattisgarh 5 - Bindeshwar Ram Bhagat S/o Bifnath, Aged About 32 Years R/o Villge Bumtel, Post Jadiya, Police Station Manora, District Jashpur Chhattisgarh., District : Jashpur, Chhattisgarh 6 - Santosh Kumar S/o Mansai, Aged About 25 Years R/o Village Barjor, Post Kansagel, Police Station Kansabel, District Jashpur Chhattisgarh., District : Jashpur, Chhattisgarh 2 7 - Ramnath Ram S/o Kadva Ram, Aged About 28 Years R/o Village Basantala, Post Basantala, Police Station Kunkuri, District Jashpur Chhattisgarh., District : Jashpur, Chhattisgarh 8 - Atwa Ram S/o Lodo Ram, Aged About 35 Years R/o Village Alori, Post Ghaghra, Police Station Sonkyari, District Jashpur Chhattisgarh., District : Jashpur, Chhattisgarh 9 - Bindheshwar Ram S/o Thakwa Ram, Aged About 28 Years R/o Village Lamdarha, Post Bagicha, Police Station Bagicha, District Jashpur Chhattisgarh., District : Jashpur, Chhattisgarh 10 - Biharu Ram S/o Lodo Ram, Aged About 30 Years R/o Village Sonkyari, Post Sonkyari, Police Station Sonkyari, District Jashpur Chhattisgarh., District : Jashpur, Chhattisgarh 11 - Mansai Ram S/o Gailu Ram Aged About 27 Years R/o Village Sinkyari, Post Sonkyari, Police Station Sonkyari, District Jashpur Chhattisgarh., District : Jashpur, Chhattisgarh 12 - Ku. Rajmuni Bai D/o Lerangu Ram, Aged About 27 Years R/o Gajma, Post Gajma, Police Station Manora, District Jashpur Chhattisgarh., District : Jashpur, Chhattisgarh 13 - Kriti Kumar Yadav, S/o Ugrasen Ram, Aged About 42 Years R/o Village Gadbahar, Post Keradih, Police Station Kunkuri, Disrtict Jashpur Chhattisgarh., District : Jashpur, Chhattisgarh 14 - Rijhan Lal S/o Sukdu Ram, Aged About 36 Years R/o Village Kurumkela, Post Bagicha, Police Station Bagicha, District Jashpur Chhattisgarh., District : Jashpur, Chhattisgarh ... Petitioner(s) versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Secretary, Department Of Education, Mantralaya, Mahanadi Bhawan, Naya Raipur. , Chhattisgarh 2 - District Education Officer, Jashpur, District Jashpur, Chhattisgarh., District : Jashpur, Chhattisgarh 3 3 - Block Education Officer, Pathalgaon Block, Jashpur, District Jashpur Chhattisgarh., District : Jashpur, Chhattisgarh ... Respondent(s) For Petitioners : Mr. H.S. Ahluwalia, Advocate For Respondent/State : Ms. Shailja Shukla, Deputy Government Advocate Hon'ble Shri Justice Rakesh Mohan Pandey Order on Board 12.09.2025 1. The petitioners have filed this petition seeking the following reliefs:- “i) The Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to command the respondents to produce the entire records of the case particularly the records of the petitioners, for perusal of this Hon'ble Court. ii) The Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased direct the respondent authorities to fixed the payscale of the petitioners as similar to the pay-scale of the regular appointee, in the interest of justice. Iii) The Hon’ble Court may kindly be pleased to direct the respondent authorities to fixed the pay-scale of the petitioners as per setup dated 25.10.2010, in the interest of justice. iv) Any other relief, which may be suitable in the facts and circumstances of the case. This petition, may be allowed. with cost.” 2. Learned counsel for the petitioners would submit that the petitioners were appointed in the contingency establishment on 4 Collector rate for a period of three years and upon completion of the said period, they became entitled to the revised pay-scale. It is contended that after completion of three years, the petitioners became eligible to receive the regular pay-scale of Rs. 4750– 7440/- with a grade pay of Rs. 1300/- per month. 3. Learned counsel would further submit that despite making several representations, no benefit has been extended to the petitioners. He refers to a circular dated 12.09.2011 (Annexure RJ/2), whereby the State Government extended the benefit of a regular pay-scale to Class-IV contingency establishment employees on completion of three years of service. Accordingly, a direction may be issued to the respondents to grant the petitioners the regular pay-scale of Rs. 4750–7440/- with a grade pay of Rs. 1300/- from the date of their eligibility. 4. On the other hand, learned counsel for the State opposes the submissions and submits that the petitioners are daily-rated employees engaged on Collector rate. Their services have never been regularized by the department, therefore they are not entitled to the benefits of regular pay-scale. He further contends that no specific order has been issued by the Government granting such benefits to the petitioners. 5 5. Heard counsel for the parties and perused the documents present on the record. 6. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the documents placed on record. 7. The facts, as borne out from the record, are that the petitioners were appointed between the years 2007 and 2008 on different dates as Class-IV employees (Peon/Waterman/Watchman/Cook) in schools working under the Assistant Commissioner, Tribal Welfare Development Department, Jashpur, District Jashpur. Their appointments were made on monthly Collector rate wages, pursuant to the prevailing executive instructions dated 19.10.2006 and 29.10.2006, after undergoing a selection process conducted by a duly constituted committee. 8. At present, the services of the petitioners are under the control of the Education Department. The State/respondent No.1, in the name of the Hon'ble Governor, vide notification dated 25.10.2010, came up with a new setup for all Class-IV employees working under the department. By the said notification, all Class-IV Collector rate posts were upgraded into contingency establishment posts, carrying a pay-scale of Rs. 4750–7440/- with grade pay of Rs. 1300/- per month. Such employees were to be 6 governed by the provisions of the Work-Charged and Contingency Service Conditions Rules. 9. The petitioners are performing duties of a similar nature as compare to the regular appointees on the same posts, but are being paid only at Collector rate, which is substantially lower than the minimum pay-scale fixed for regular appointees. 10. Taking into consideration the above-stated facts and circulars issued by the State Government from time to time, this petition is disposed of reserving liberty in favour of the petitioners to make representation(s) before respondent No.2 within a period of 30 days. 11. The Competent Authority is directed to decide such representation(s) in an objective manner, in light of the circulars dated 12.9.2011 & 11.1.2021, within a further period of 90 days. Sd/- (Rakesh Mohan Pandey) Judge Nadim