1 2025:CGHC:56582 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPS No. 5678 of 2023 1 - Manish Kumar Kaushik S/o Murit Ram Kaushik, Aged About 37 Years Presently Working As Lecturer (L.B.) At Govt. High School Devtikra, Block Udaipur, District Surguja (Chhattisgarh) 2 - Arvind Kumar Dhruw S/o Basawan Singh Dhruw, Aged About 39 Years Presently Working As Teacher (L.B.) At Govt. Middle School Vishunpur, Block Udaipur, District Surguja (Chhattisgarh) 3 - Smt. Rashmi Kerketta, W/o Vikas Kakde, Aged About 40 Years Presently Working As Teacher (L.B.) At Govt. Middle School Fatehpur, Block Udaipur, District Surguja (Chhattisgarh) 4 - Smt. Ganga Singh, W/o Chandeshwar Kumar Singh, Aged About 39 Years Presently Working As Teacher (L.B.) At Govt. Middle School Vishunpur, Block Udaipur, District Surguja (Chhattisgarh) 5 - Durga Prasad Markam, S/o Sita Ram Markam, Aged About 48 Years Presently Working As Teacher (L.B.) At Govt. High School Devtikra, Block Udaipur, District Surguja (Chhattisgarh) 6 - Jugesh Singh, S/o Sagar Ram, Aged About 47 Years Presently Working As Lecturer (L.B.) At Govt. High School Devtikra, Block Udaipur, District Surguja (Chhattisgarh) RAGHVENDRA JAT Digitally signed by RAGHVENDRA JAT 2 7 - Jagdal Singh, S/o Manijer Ram, Aged About 35 Years Presently Working As Lecturer (L.B.) At Govt. High School Mareya, Block Udaipur, District Surguja (Chhattisgarh) 8 - Smt. Pramila Sarojini Lakra, D/o Paolus Kujur, D/o Paolus Kujur, Aged About 48 Years Presently Working As Lecturer (L.B.) At Govt. K.G.B.V. Udaipur, Block Udaipur, District Surguja (Chhattisgarh) 9 - Premdas Baghel, S/o Nohar Baghel, Aged About 41 Years Presently Working As Lecturer (L.B.) At Govt. High School Devtikra, Block Udaipur, District Surguja (Chhattisgarh) ... Petitioner(s) versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through Secretary, Panchayat And Rural Development Department, Mantralaya, Mahanadi Bhawan, Nava Raipur, Atal Nagar, District Raipur (Chhattisgarh) 2 - Secretary. School Education Department, Mantralaya, Mahanadi Bhawan, Nava Raipur, Atal Nagar, District Raipur (Chhattisgarh) 3 - Director, Office Of Directorate Of Panchayat, Raipur, District Raipur (Chhattisgarh) 4 - Director, Public Instructions, Raipur, District Raipur (Chhattisgarh) 5 - Chief Executive Officer, Zila Panchayat Ambikapur, District Surguja (Chhattisgarh). 6 - District Education Officer, Ambikapur, District Surguja (Chhattisgarh) 7 - Block Education Officer, Udaipur, District Surguja (Chhattisgarh) ... Respondent(s) 3 For Petitioner(s) : Mr. C. Jayant K. Rao, Advocate. For Respondent(s)/State : Mr. Devesh G. Kela, Panel Lawyer. Hon’ble Mr. Justice Amitendra Kishore Prasad Order on Board 20/11/2025 1. By way of this petition, the petitioners has prayed for following reliefs:- “10.1. That, this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to direct the respondent authorities to grant arrears of the revised pay scale to the petitioners. 10.2. That, this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to grant any other relief as it may deems fit and appropriate.” 2. Brief facts of the case, is that, all the petitioners have completed more than eight years of service, and pursuant to the order of this Hon’ble Court, they were granted the revised pay scale by taking into account their earlier period of service. However, despite the grant of the revised pay scale, the arrears payable from the date of completion of eight years of service were not released. Instead, only a token amount towards the arrears was sanctioned, with a direction that the remaining arrears would be disbursed upon allotment of funds by the State Government. Thereafter, vide order dated 23.11.2022, funds were allotted for payment of the arrears, and the process was required to be completed by 31.03.2023; yet, the arrears were not paid to the petitioners. Subsequently, by letter dated 25.07.2023, further funds were 4 allotted with the stipulation that priority would be given to those employees in whose favour orders had been passed by the Hon’ble Court regarding arrears. Despite this second allotment, the names of the petitioners were again not considered for release of arrears. Hence, the present writ petition has been filed. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the present petition has been instituted seeking the grant of arrears arising from the revised pay scale, which the petitioners are lawfully entitled to receive. It is contended that although the revised pay scale has been extended to the petitioners, the consequential arrears have not yet been disbursed, thereby causing undue financial hardship. He further submits that the petitioners confines their relief to this limited prayer alone, namely, the direction for release of the arrears of the revised pay scale, which, in the interest of justice, deserves to be granted. 4. On the other hand, learned counsel for the State submits that, to the best of his information, the petitioners have already been extended the benefit of the arrears arising from the revised pay scale, and therefore the grievance now sought to be raised may no longer survive for consideration. 5. Considering the submissions advanced by learned counsel for both the parties, and taking into account that in an identical matter, namely WPS No. 2018/2023, this Court had directed the petitioner therein to submit a representation before the competent authorities in the event of non-receipt of arrears of the revised pay 5 scale, with a further direction that such representation be duly considered and decided by the authorities concerned, this Court is inclined to follow the same course of action in the present case as well. 6. If the petitioners have already been extended the benefit of arrears arising from the revised pay scale, then the relief sought in the present petition stands effectively satisfied, rendering the proceedings infructuous, consequently, no further orders are required to be passed by this Court in such circumstances. 7. Learned counsel for the petitioners are not aware of the fact that it has been received or not. 8. With this observation and direction, the writ petition is disposed of. Sd/- (Amitendra Kishore Prasad) Judge Raghu Jat