1 2026:CGHC:19752 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPS No. 3392 of 2026 Smt. Manju Sinha W/o- Shri Vinod Kumar Sinha Aged About 57 Years Posted And Working As Teacher (L.B.) At Govt. Middle School, Gadadih, Block- Kurud, District- Dhamtari (C.G.) ... Petitioner versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Secretary, School Education Department, Mantralaya, Mahanadi Bhawan, Atal Nagar, Nawa Raipur, District- Raipur (C.G.) 2 - Director, Directorate Of Public Instructions, Indrawati Bhawan, Atal Nagar, Nawa Raipur, District- Raipur (C.G.) 3 - Joint Director, Education Division, Raipur, District- Raipur (C.G.) 4 - District Education Officer, Dhamtari, District-Dhamtari (C.G.) 5 - Block Education Officer, Kurud, District-Dhamtari (C.G.) 6 - Chief Executive Officer, District Panchayat, Dhamtari, District-Dhamtari (C.G.) 7 - Chief Executive Officer, Janpad Panchayat,kurud, District-Dhamtari (C.G.) ... Respondents ALFIZA BAIG Digitally signed by ALFIZA BAIG Date: 2026.04.29 17:37:23 +0530 2 For Petitioner : Mr. Ankush Soni, Advocate For Respondents/State : Mr. Aditya Tiwari, Panel lawyer Hon'ble Shri Justice Parth Prateem Sahu Order On Board 29.04.2026 1. Petitioner has filed this petition seeking following relief (s) :- “10.1 That, this Hon’ble Court may kindly be pleased to issue a writ in the nature of mandamus quashing the impugned order dated 30.09.2025 (Annexuer P/1) passed by the respondent no. 2. 10.2 That, the Hon’ble Court may kindly be pleased to direct the respondent authorities to consider the case of the petitioner for grant of benefit of Kramonnati Vetanman on completion of 10 years of services in light of the circular dated 10.03.2017 issued by the State Govt. and order passed by the Hon’ble Division Bench in case of Smt. Sona Sahu Vs. State of Chhattisgarh vide order dated 28.02.2024. 10.3 That, this Hon’ble court may kindly be pleased to direct the respondent authorities to grant all benefit of petitioner including the arrears of pay with 18% interest per annum from the date of completion of 10 years of services till the actual payment of Kramonnati Vetanmaan within the stipulated period of 30 days. 10.4 That, this Hon’ble Court may kindly be pleased to disposed of the instant writ petition with similar order passed in the case of Smt. Sona Sahu Vs. State of Chhattisgarh & Others in Writ Appeal No. 261/2023 order passed on 28.02.2024. 3 10.5 That, any other relief may also be granted to the petitioner which this Hon’ble Court deemed fit in facts and circumstances of the case. ” 2. Learned counsel for petitioner submits that petitioner is entitled for Kramonnati Vetanman in terms of decision in case of Sona Sahu Vs. State of Chhattisgarh, in W.A. No.261 of 2023, decided on 28.02.2024. 3. Learned State counsel opposes the submission of learned counsel for petitioner and would submit that case of the petitioner is different than that of case of Sona Sahu. Petitioner was earlier employee of Panchayat Department and thereafter, she was absorbed in Education Department pursuant to policy decision taken by State Government on 30.06.2018. Petitioner was not appointed as regular Assistant Teacher by School Education Department but was appointed by Janpad Panchayat. Coordinate Bench of this Court has considered the issue with regard to grant of Kramonnati Vetanman to such employee in WPS No.11009 of 2025 and other batch of writ petitions and has dismissed those writ petitions. 4. Petitioner upon asking do not dispute the submission of learned State counsel with respect to her initial appointment under Panchayat Department by Janpad Panchayat as also decision in WP(S) No.11009 of 2025. 5. Coordinate Bench of this Court while considering the batch of writ petitions lead case bearing WPS No. 11009 of 2025 with regard to grant of Kramonnati to petitioner therein, has dismissed the writ petitions and observed thus :- 4 “35. Considering the facts of the case that the petitioners till absorption in pursuance of the policy dated 30.06.2018 are not teachers of the School Education Department, they were shikshakarmis though their designation has been changed as Assistant Teacher (panchayat), Teacher (panchayat) and Lecturer (panchayat) respectively and they are governed by the separate rules framed under the Panchayat Raj Adhiniyam, 1993, therefore, the petitioners are not fulfilling the criteria as laid down in the circular dated 10.03.2017, the bunch of the writ petitions are liable to be dismissed, accordingly, they are dismissed.” 6. Since the facts of the case of petitioner as is identical to the facts of the case in WP(S) No.11009 of 2025 is not disputed, this petition is also dismissed in terms of order passed in WPS No.11009 of 2025 and other connected case decided on 24.11.2025. sd/- (Parth Prateem Sahu) Judge alfiza