Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Chhattisgarh · body

2026 DAILYLAW 10133 (CHH)

GOKUL RAM THAKUR v. STATE OF CHHATTISGARH

WPS/3741/2026 · 2026-04-29

Shri Parth Prateem Sahu

body2026

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

1 2026:CGHC:20054 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPS No. 3741 of 2026 1 - Gokul Ram Thakur S/o- Baldu Ram Thakur Aged About 56 Years R/o- House No. 35/k, Village- Mohlai, Tehsil And District- Durg (C.G.- 491001) ... Petitioner versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Secretary, Department Of Scheduled Castes And Scheduled Tribe Development, Indravati Bhawan, Atal Nagar, Nava Raipur, District- Raipur (C.G.) 2 - Commissioner, Department Of Scheduled Castes And Scheduled Tribe Development, Indravati Bhawan, Atal Nagar, Nava Raipur, District- Raipur (C.G.) 3 - Collector (Tribal Welfare), Balod, District- Balod, C.G. 4 - Assistant Commissioner (Tribal Welfare), Balod, District- Balod, C.G. 5 - District Education Officer, Balod, District- Balod (C.G.) 6 - District Education Officer, Durg, District- Durg, C.G. ... Respondent(s) (Cause title is taken from CIS) For Petitioner : Mr. Nitesh Jain, Advocate For State/Respondents : Mr. Lav Sharma, Panel Lawyer SB: Hon'ble Shri Parth Prateem Sahu, Judge Order on Board RAVI SHANKAR MANDAVI Digitally signed by RAVI SHANKAR MANDAVI Date: 2026.05.05 18:58:17 +0530 2 30/04/2026 1. Petitioner has filed this writ petition seeking following reliefs:- “10.1. To issue a writ and/or an order in the nature of appropriate writ do issue calling the records from the respondent authorities concerned for perusal of this Hon'ble Court, if thinks fit in the facts & circumstances of case; 10.2 To issue a writ and/or order in the nature of writ of Mandamus do issue for time bound disposal of the petitioner's representation dated 17/12/2025 pertaining to computation and payment of difference of salary of period between completion of probation and actual formal regularization (ANNEXURE P-1) pending before the respondent number 4, in accordance with the applicable laws and provisions in the interest of justice within the time frame as fixed by this Hon'ble Court in the facts and circumstances of the case. 10.3 To issue a writ and/or an order in the nature of writ of mandamus do issue commanding and directing the respondent authorities to pass an order for computing and payment of difference of salary of period between completion of probation and actual formal regularization i.e. from 1995 to 2008 along with an interest @ 18% per annum from the date of accrual till the date of realisation in the facts and circumstances of the case and on such terms and conditions as the court may deem fit in the interest of justice. 10.4 To grant cost of the proceedings. 10.5 To grant any other relief deemed just and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case for imparting complete and substantial justice to the petitioner.” 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submit that petitioner was engaged as daily wages employee on collector rate in the year 1992 and thereafter, he was regularized in the year 2008, 3 however the respondent authorities have not paid the difference of pay from the date of appointment till the date of regularization. Petitioner has submitted representation vide Annexure P/1 before respondent No.4 which is pending consideration, therefore petitioner is not pressing this writ petition at this stage and only seeking a direction to respondent No.4 to consider and take decision on the representation at the earliest within a specific time period. 3. Counsel for the respondent-State submits that as petitioner is only seeking a direction to respondent No.4 to take decision on the pending representation, he is having no objection to the limited prayer made by the counsel for the petitioner. 4. On due consideration of submission made by the learned counsel for the respective parties, this writ petition at this stage is disposed of, directing the respondent No.4 to consider and take decision on pending representation submitted by the petitioner in accordance with law, expeditiously preferably within a further period of 3 months from the date of receipt of order. 5. With the aforesaid observation and direction, this writ petition stands finally disposed of. Sd/- (Parth Prateem Sahu) Judge Ravi Mandavi