1 2026:CGHC:2171 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPS No. 333 of 2026 1 - Chandkishor Rahangdale S/o Hemraj Rahangdale Aged About 55 Years Posted As Principal Government Polytechnic Bijapur, Distt. Bijapur, Chhattisgarh. --- Petitioner(s) versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through Its Secretary, Skill Development, Technical Education And Employment Department Mantralaya, Mahandi Bhawan, Naya Raipur, Distt. Raipur, Chhattisgarh. 2 - Director Directorate Of Technical Education Indrawati Bhawan, Naya Raipur, Atal Nagar, Raipur, Distt. Raipur, Chhattisgarh. 3 - Chairman All India Council Of Technical Education (Aicte, New Delhi), Nelson Mandela Marg, Vasant Kunj, New Delhi 110070 --- Respondent(s) For Petitioner : Mr. Mateen Siddiqui, Advocate For Respondents/State No.1 & 2 : Ms. Akanksha Verma Dabhadekar, P.L. For Respondent No. : Mr. Ajit Singh, Advocate Hon'ble Shri Justice Parth Prateem Sahu Order On Board 14/01/2026 1. Petitioner is working as Principal, Govt. Polytechnic College, Bijapur, District - Bijapur. Grievance of petitioner is that respondents are not considering the claim of petitioner for grant of Rs.10,000/- as AGP. 2. Learned counsel for petitioner submits that petitioner has already submitted representation, before respondent No.1 for redressal of his grievances of non-payment of Rs.10,000/- towards AGP for which he BALRAM PRASAD DEWANGAN Digitally signed by BALRAM PRASAD DEWANGAN 2 is entitled as per Schedule-I, Chhattisgarh Technical Education (Teaching Cadre Polytechnic) Gazetted Services Recruitment Rules, 2014. He submits that as per Schedule-I of Rules, 2014, pay scale of Principal is provided at Sr. No.1 (A), which provides for grant of Rs.10,000/- along with pay scale and special allowance of Rs.2000/- per month. Petitioner was promoted to the post of Principal vide order dated 30.03.2022 and by virtue of Rules, 2014, petitioner is entitled for Rs.10,000/- towards Grade Pay. Representation submitted by petitioner has not been decided till date, therefore, at this stage, grievance of petitioner would be redressed, if respondents is directed to consider and decide the representation submitted by petitioner within specified time. 3. Learned State counsel submits that at this stage he is having no objection to the limited prayer made by petitioner to consider and decide representation (Annexure P-6), pending before respondent No.1 & 3. 4. I have heard learned counsel for parties and perused the documents placed on record. 5. Annexure P-1 is order of promotion dated 30.03.2022 by which Head of Department were promoted to the post of Principal. Name of petitioner finds place at Sr. No.9. Rules of 2014 is filed as Annexure P- 2 along with Schedule-I, which prescribes pay-scale of Principal at Sr. No.1(A) of Rs.37400 – 67000 + GP 10000 and Special Allowance per month Rs.2000/-. 6. In view of aforementioned facts of the case and limited prayer made by petitioner, I find it appropriate to dispose of the writ petition directing 3 respondents No.1 to consider and decide representation dated 01.10.2024 (Annexure P-6 collectively) within a period of 3 months from the date of receipt of copy of order passed by this Court. Petitioner will be at liberty to submit fresh representation if he so desire along with copy of order passed by this Court. 7. In view of the above, writ petition stands disposed off. Sd/- (Parth Prateem Sahu) Judge Balram