1 2026:CGHC:9980 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPS No. 2066 of 2026 1 - Aparna Thakur W/o Ranjeet Singh Thakur Aged About 50 Years Presently Posted As Head Master At Govt. Primary School Rawabhata, Block Dharsiwa, District - Raipur Chhattisgarh 2 - Rohit Kumar Sahu S/o Punaram Sahu Aged About 49 Years Presently Posted As Teacher, At Govt. Primary School Rawabhata, Block - Dharsiwa, District Raipur Chhattisgarh 3 - Bhimsen Verma S/o Malik Ram Verma Aged About 56 Years Presently Posted As Teacher At Sages Tilak Nagar Gudhiyari Raipur, Block - Dharsiwa, District Raipur Chhattisgarh --- Petitioner(s) versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Secretary School Education Department, Mantralaya Mahanadi Bhawan, Atal Nagar, Naya Raipur, Revenue And Civil District Raipur Chhattisgarh 2 - The Secretary Panchayat And Rural Development, Government Of Chhattisgarh, Mantralaya Mahanadi Bhawan, Atal Nagar, Naya Raipur, Revenue And Civil District Raipur Chhattisgarh 3 - Director Directorate Of Public Instruction, Indrawati Bhawan, Atal Nagar, Naya Raipur, District Raipur Chhattisgarh 4 - The Commissioner Cum Director Directorate Of Panchayat, Indravati Bhawan, Atal Nagar, Naya Raipur, District Raipur Chhattisgarh BALRAM PRASAD DEWANGAN Digitally signed by BALRAM PRASAD DEWANGAN 2 5 - The District Education Officer Raipur, District Raipur Chhattisgarh 6 - The Block Education Officer Dharsiwa, District Raipur Chhattisgarh 7 - The Chief Executive Officer Zila Panchayat Raipur, District Raipur Chhattisgarh 8 - The Chief Executive Officer Janpad Panchayat Dharsiwa, District Raipur Chhattisgarh --- Respondent(s) (Cause title is taken from CIS system) For Petitioner : Mr. R.K. Verma, Advocate For Respondents/State : Ms. Shailja Shukla, G.A. Hon'ble Shri Justice Parth Prateem Sahu Order On Board 26/02/2026 1. Petitioners have filed this petition seeking following relief (s) :- “10.1 This Hon’ble Court may kindly be pleased to pass an appropriate order and call for the entire records for the case of the petitioners. 10.2 This Hon’ble Court may kindly be pleased to pass an appropriate order or issue writ and direct the respondent authorities to grant the amount/benefit of Kramonnati Vetanman to petitioners in view of Circular dated 10.03.2017 issued by the State Government along with an interest @ 18% per annum, from the date of completion of 10 years of service till the actual payment of Kramonnati vetanman within a stipulated period of 30 days, in the interest of justice. 3 10.3 This Hon’ble Court may further be pleased to pass an appropriate order or issue writ as deemed fit under the facts and circumstances of the case” 2. Learned counsel for petitioners submits that petitioners are 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 petitioners and would submit that case of the petitioners is different than that of case of Sona Sahu. Petitioners were earlier employee of Panchayat Department and thereafter, he was absorbed in Education Department pursuant to policy decision taken by State Government on 30.06.2018. Petitioners were 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. Petitioners upon asking do not dispute the submission of learned State counsel with respect to their initial appointment under Panchayat Department by Janpad Panchayat as also decision in WP(S) No.11009 of 2025. 5. The 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 petitioners therein, has dismissed the writ petitions and observed thus :- “35. Considering the facts of the case that the petitioners till absorption in pursuance of the policy 4 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 petitioners 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 Balram