Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Chhattisgarh · body

2026 DAILYLAW 15718 (CHH)

SMT. LALITA JURESIA v. STATE OF CHHATTISGARH

WPS/515/2026 · 2026-01-18

Shri Parth Prateem Sahu

body2026

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

1 / 2 2026:CGHC:2940 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPS No. 515 of 2026 • Smt. Lalita Juresia W/o Late Shri Ramji Lal Juresia Aged About 57 Years R/o Ambagarh Chowki, Police Station- Ambagarh Chowki, District- Manpur- Mohla-Ambagarh Chowki (C.G.) ... Petitioner versus 1. State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Secretary, Public Works Department, Mantralaya, Mahanadi Bhawan, New Raipur, District Raipur (C.G.) 2. The Superintending Engineer Public Works Department, Durg Division, District- Durg (C.G.) 3. The Executive Engineer Public Works Department, Rajnandgaon Division, District- Rajnandgaon (C.G.) ... Respondents For Petitioner : Mr. Gourav Singhal, Advocate For Respondent-State : Ms. Diksha Gouraha, Dy. Govt. Adv. Hon'ble Shri Parth Prateem Sahu, Judge ORDER ON BOARD 19/01/2026 1. Petitioner has filed this writ petition seeking following reliefs. “10.1 That, this Hon’ble Court may kindly be pleased to direct the respondent authorities to consider and decide the representation of petitioner for grant of pay scale on the post of Rs. 2610-60-3750-65-3540 on the post of Helper. 10.2 That, any other relief/order which may deem fit and just in the facts and circumstances of the case including award of the costs of the petition may be given.” 2. Learned counsel for petitioner submits that petitioner is holding post of Helper, however, respondents are making payment of wages/ salary fixed for PAWAN KUMAR JHA Digitally signed by PAWAN KUMAR JHA 2 / 2 Watchman. Petitioner has made several oral requests and subsequently submitted a representation before Respondent No. 3 on 27.11.2024, however, no decision has been taken on the representation submitted by him. Therefore, direction be issued to Respondent No. 3 to take decision on the claim of petitioner at the earliest. 3. Learned State counsel submits that in view of limited prayer made by learned counsel for petitioner for direction to the authorities, she is having no objection. 4. On due consideration of the submission made by learned counsel for the respective parties, this writ petition at this stage is disposed of directing Respondent No. 3 to take decision on the claim of petitioner submitted vide representation dated 27.11.2024 in accordance with law, expeditiously, preferably within a further period of 02 months from the date of receipt of copy of order passed by this Court. 5. At this stage, learned counsel for petitioner submits that petitioner may be permitted to submit a fresh representation and the concerned authorities be directed to take decision on the same at the earliest. 6. In view of above submission, petitioner is permitted to make a fresh representation before Respondent No. 3 along with supporting documents and copy of order passed by this Court, and if petitioner submits fresh representation, Respondent No. 3 shall also consider and take decision on it also in terms of observation made above. 7. Accordingly, this petition is disposed of with aforesaid observations and directions. Certified copy as per rules. Sd/- (Parth Prateem Sahu) pwn JUDGE