1 2026:CGHC:22359 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPS No. 5570 of 2017 1 - Pradeep Sahu S/o Late Shri Bodhram Sahu, Aged About 52 Years R/o Kashi Nagar, Korba, Posted As I V Grade Employee, At Present Collectorate Korba, District- Korba, Chhattisgarh, Chhattisgarh ... Petitioner(s) versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through Director Department Of Employment And Training, Mahanadi Bhawan, New Mantralay, District Raipur, Chhattisgarh, Chhattisgarh 2 - The Collector, Korba, District Korba, Chhattisgarh, District : Korba, Chhattisgarh 3 - The Principle Boys Industrial Training Institute Korba, District Korba, Chhattisgarh, District : Korba, Chhattisgarh ... Respondent(s) For Petitioner : Mr. Anshul Tiwari, Advocate For State : Mr. Abhishek Singh, P.L. Hon’ble Shri Justice Rakesh Mohan Pandey Judgment On Board 12.5.2026 1) The petitioner has filed this petition seeking the following reliefs: “10.1 That this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to issue quash/ set-aside the order impugned dated NIRMALA RAO 2 02.08.2016 (Annexure P-1) passed by the respondent no. 3. 10.2 That the Hon'ble court may kindly be pleased to issue writ of mandamus directing to respondents to pay all dues with interest. 10.3 That the Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to grant any other relief, as it may deem fit and just. 10.4 Cost of the petition may also be award.” 2) The facts, in brief, are that the petitioner was appointed in the Tribal Welfare Department on 9.9.1991 to the post of Water Boy by Collector at Collector rate. The appointment of the petitioner was temporary in nature for a period of 89 days, and said period of engagement was extended from time to time. The services of the petitioner were regularized vide order dated 29.7.2003 and thereafter, pay-scale of the petitioner was fixed in accordance with the service rules, and the said decision was complied with by the Principal/ respondent No.3. The salary of the petitioner was again revised in the year 2010, which was honoured by respondent No.3. 3) Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that though the pay-scale of the petitioner was revised twice, first in the year 2003 and subsequently, in the year 2010, the benefits have not been extended yet. He would submit that in the meeting of the Departmental Promotion Committee (DPC) convened on 15.12.2022, the claim of the petitioner was approved even though 3 no decision has been taken with regard to the disbursal of arrears of salary. He would pray that a direction may be issued to the respondent authorities to make payment of the arrears of salary pursuant to decision taken by the Departmental Promotion Committee dated 15.12.2022. 4) On the other hand, learned counsel for the State would oppose the submissions made by counsel for the petitioner. He would submit that the petitioner is not entitled to arrears of salary and the petition is misconceived and deserves to be dismissed. 5) I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the documents present on record. 6) Perusal of the documents would reveal that the pay-scale of the petitioner was first revised in the year 2003 and the same was complied with by respondent No.3. Subsequently, the pay-scale of the petitioner was revised in the year 2010, and again, such decision was honoured by respondent No.3. The Departmental Promotion Committee, in its meeting dated 15.12.2022, approved the claim of the petitioner with regard to arrears of salary etc.; however, till date, such decision has not been executed by the respondent authorities. 7) Taking into consideration the facts discussed above and the decision taken by the Departmental Promotion Committee dated 15.12.2022, this petition is disposed of with a direction to respondent No.1 to consider the claim of the petitioner and make 4 payment of arrears of salary pursuant to decision taken by the Departmental Promotion Committee in its meeting dated 15.12.2022. The entire exercise shall be completed within a period of 90 days from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. 8) Perusal of the return filed by the State would show that the decision taken by the Departmental Promotion Committee in its meeting 15.12.2022 has not been challenged before any forum and thus, has attained finality. 9) With the aforesaid observation(s), this petition is disposed of. Sd/- (Rakesh Mohan Pandey) JUDGE Nimmi