1 / 3 2026:CGHC:20880 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPS No. 3884 of 2026 1 - Roopdhar Prasad Sao S/o - Late Pila Lal Sao Aged About 75 Years Retired 'sthal Sahayak' Posted At P W D (B/ R) Sub Division Raigarh, Public Works Department District Raigarh (C.G.) R/o - Village And Post Tamnar Tahsil Tamnar District Raigarh (C.G.) 2 - D.P. Dansena S/o - Late Narmada Prasad Dansena Aged About 81 Years Retired 'sthal Sahayak' Posted At Public Works Department Sub Division Office Rastriya Rajmarg Sub Division Raigarh District Raigarh (C.G.) R/o - Near Kali Mandir Sonmuda Raigarh Tahsil And District Raigarh (C.G.) 3 - Sudip Bhadra S/o - Late Nand Lal Bhadra Aged About 53 Years Working As 'sthal Sahayak' Posted At P W D (B/ R) Sub Division Raigarh, Public Works Department District Raigarh (C.G.) R/o - H.N. 740 Ward No. 28, Chhote Atarmuda Chakradhar Nagar Tahsil And District Raigarh (C.G.) ... Petitioner(s) Versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through Secretary, Public Works Department Mahanadi Bhawan, Mantralaya, Atal Nagar New Raipur District - Raipur (C.G.) 2 - Engineer In Chief Public Works Department, Sihawa Bhawan New Raipur, District - Raipur (C.G.) 3 - Chief Engineer Public Works Department, Bilaspur Mandal, District - Bilaspur (C.G.) 4 - Superintending Engineer Public Works Department, Bilaspur Mandal, District - Bilaspur (C.G.) 5 - Executive Engineer Public Works Department, Division Raigarh District Raigarh (C.G.) 2 / 3 6 - Superintending Engineer Public Work Department Rastriya Rajmarg Division Bilaspur Near Collector Office Bilaspur District Bilaspur (C.G.) 7 - Executive Engineer Public Work Department Rastriya Rajmarg Division Bilaspur Near Collector Office Bilaspur District Bilaspur (C.G.) 8 - Joint Director Pension And Account Treasury Department Bilaspur Division, District Bilaspur (C.G.) ... Respondent(s) For Petitioner : Ms. Mamta Mahilange, Advocate For State : Mr. Suyash Dhar Badgaiya, G.A. HON'BLE SHRI PARTH PRATEEM SAHU, JUDGE ORDER ON BOARD 05.05.2026 1. The petitioners have filled this petition seeking the following reliefs:- “10.1 That this Hon'ble court may kindly be pleased to allow the writ petition and be pleased to direct the respondents to remove the anomaly accord in the service of petitioners. 10.2 That, the Hon'ble Curt may kindly be pleased to direct the respondents to grant pay scale published in the Gazette dated 14.10.1982 and also direct to pay the arrears to the petitioners from their initial date of appointment. 10.3 That, if the Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper be pleased to dispose of this writ petition granting same relief of making fresh representation to the competent authority, which is granted in W.P.S. No. 765/2025 disposed of on 15.01.2026 (P/11). 10.4 That, this Hon'ble court may kindly be call for the records for its kind perusal which relates to petitioner's matter. 10.5 Any other relief, which this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper, may also be passed in favour of the petitioners.” 2. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioners submitted that in similarly situated facts and the question of law, batch of the writ petition, lead case being Writ Petition (S) No. 2904 of 2005 [Dwarikadas Vaishnav & 3 / 3 another Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh (now Chhattisgarh) and others] has been considered and decided by the Coordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated 05.12.2012, in which, the petitioners, in those cases, have been granted liberty to file a fresh representation before competent authority, therefore, this petition may also be disposed of in light of that order directing the respondents- Competent Authority to consider the case of the petitioners for revision of his pay scale in accordance with the Notification dated 14.10.1992 (which was modified subsequently as 14.10.1982) issued by State of Madhya Pradesh, as the petitioners were earlier working as daily wage employee and subsequently, their services were regularized. 3. Learned counsel appearing for the State/respondents would submit that earlier the respondent/State had already considered the issue of the petitioners in the light of the judgment passed by State Administrative Tribunal, Gwalior Bench in Laxmi Narayan Upadhyay v. State of M.P., however, he submits that if the petitioners file a fresh representation, the State will consider their case in light of the notification as mentioned herein above. 4. In view of the above submissions made by the parties, this petition is disposed of permitting petitioners to submit fresh representation before the competent authority and in turn the concerned authority shall consider and decide the same in the light of the aforementioned notification expeditiously preferably within a period of six months from the date of receipt of copy of this order. 5. With the aforesaid observation, the writ petition is disposed off. Sd/- (Parth Prateem Sahu) Saurabh JUDGE