1 2026:CGHC:21590 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPS No. 3994 of 2026 1 - Bhimsen S/o Late Sohan Lal Aged About 41 Years R/o Vill. Jamruwa, Tah. Balod, Distt.- Balod (C.G.) 2 - Jangalu Ram S/o Mishrilal Aged About 48 Years R/o Vill. Malkunwar, Distt.- Balod (C.G.) 3 - Banshilal Sahu S/o Bisauharam Sahu Aged About 47 Years R/o H. No. 82, Vill.- Gidhali, Distt.- Balod (C.G.) 4 - Arjun Singh Sahare S/o Sheetal Ram Sahare Aged About 55 Years R/o H. No. 211, Ward No. 12, Vill. Gujra, Distt.- Balod (C.G.) 5 - Belobai W/o Rup Singh Aged About 53 Years R/o Ward No. 07, Bhandari Para, Vill. Daundi, P.O.- Dondiawari, Distt.- Balod (C.G.) 6 - Anita Tekam W/o Ramesh Kumar Aged About 51 Years R/o Ward No. 10, Vill.- Doundi, Jawaharpara, Distt.- Balod (C.G.) 7 - Sundaram Gavade S/o Late Sherasingh Gavade Aged About 52 Years R/o Vill.- Mardel, P.O.- Sundongar, Dondi, Distt.- Balod (C.G.) 8 - Prakash Kumar Netam S/o Hridayalal Aged About 44 Years R/o Mangal Tarai, Singhola, Distt.- Durg (C.G.) 9 - Hemnath Sahu S/o Late Shobit Ram Sahu Aged About 53 Years R/o Vill. Piparchhedi, Po- Charwahi, Distt.- Balod (C.G.) SOURABH BHILWAR Digitally signed by SOURABH BHILWAR Date: 2026.05.09 10:56:48 +0530 2 10 - Jivanlal Thakur S/o Late Guhalend Singh Aged About 53 Years R/o Chhindagaon, Dondiawari, Distt.- Balod (C.G.) 11 - Ajay Singh Kunjam S/o Jaymun Lal Aged About 38 Years R/o Ward No. 05, Vill. Salhe, Po- Dallirajhara, Distt.- Durg (C.G.) 12 - Anita Bai Bandhaw S/o Mahesh Kumar Aged About 45 Years R/o H. No. 54, Basti Para, Bharadakala, Distt.- Balod (C.G.) ... Petitioner(s) versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Secretary, Department Of Aadim Jati And Anusuchit Jati Vikas, Mantralaya, Mahanadi Bhawan, Naya Raipur, Distt. Raipur (C.G.) 2 - Commissioner Aadim Jati Evam Anusuchit Jati Vikas Vibhag, Raipur, Distt.- Raipur (C.G.) 3 - Assistant Commissioner Tribal Development, Balod, Distt.- Balod (C.G.) 4 - The Collector Balod, Distt.- Balod (C.G.) ... Respondent (Cause title is taken from Case Information System) For Petitioners : Mr. Anchal Kumar Matre, Advocate For Respondent/ State : Mr. Love Sharma, Panel Lawyer (HON’BLE SHRI JUSTICE BIBHU DATTA GURU) Order on Board 08/05/2026 1. By the present writ petition, the petitioners are seeking the following reliefs :- “10.1. That, this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to command the respondent to produce the entire records 3 of the case particularly the records of the petitioners, for perusal of this Hon'ble Court. 10.2. That, this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to direct the respondents to consider and declare the petitioners as permanent (regular) employees in the service in accordance with departmental policy. 10.3. That, this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to Direct the Respondents to grant the regular pay scale of Rs. 4750-7440 with Grade Pay Rs. 1300/- or such other revised pay scale as may be applicable to similarly situated employees from the date of completion of 3 years in service from initial date of appointment. 10.4. That, this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to Direct the Respondents to pay the arrears of salary along with all consequential benefits from the date the petitioners became entitled to such benefits. 10.5. That, this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to Direct the Respondents to decide the representation of the petitioners within a stipulated time frame as may be fixed by this Hon'ble Court. 10.6. That, any other relief/order which may deem fit and just in the facts and circumstances of the case including the costs of the petition.” 2. Learned counsel for the petitioners would submit that the petitioners were recruited on the contingency basis on Collector 4 rate for a period of three years and upon completion of the said period, they became entitled to the revised pay- scale. He would contend that after completion of three years, the petitioners were eligible to receive the regular pay-scale of Rs.4750 – 7440/- with a grade pay of Rs.1300/- per month. He would contend that till date, the benefit has not been extended despite making various representations. He would refer to a circular dated 12.9.2011, whereby the State Government extended the benefit of a regular pay-scale to Class-IV employees under the contingency paid employees on completion of three years of service. He would further submit that the circular dated 12.12.2014 was issued by the Commissioner to the Collector, Baloda Bazar, directing the implementation of the circular dated 12.9.2011. He would also submit that though in the return, the State has taken a stand that the circular dated 12.9.2011 was withdrawn by the State Government, but later on, the same was restored. He would also contend that a direction may be issued to the respondent authorities to consider the claim of the petitioners for grant of regular pay-scale of Rs.4750-7440/- with the grade pay of Rs.1300/- from the date they completed three years of service in the contingency establishment. 3. On the other hand, learned counsel for the State would oppose the submissions made by counsel for the petitioners. He would submit that the petitioners are daily-rated employees, receiving wages at the Collector rate, and are not entitled to the regular pay-scale as their services have never been regularized by the 5 department. He would further contend that no specific order has been issued to grant them such benefits. 4. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the documents available on the record. 5. Admittedly, the petitioners were appointed on the contingency basis on Collector rate for a period of three years. According to the letter dated 12.12.2014, it is apparent that after completion of services of three years, the petitioners were entitled to receive regular pay-scale of Rs.4750-7440/- with a grade pay of Rs.1,300/-. It is also not in dispute that the petitioners were appointed on the contingency basis and according to the circular dated 12.9.2011, they were entitled to receive regular pay-scale of Rs.4750-7440/- with grade pay of Rs.1300/- immediately after completion of three years of services. 6. Taking into consideration the above-stated facts and circulars issued by the State Government from time to time, this petition is disposed of reserving liberty in favour of the petitioners to make representation(s) before respondent No.2 within a period of 30 days. The Competent Authority is directed to decide such representation(s) in an objective manner, in light of the circulars dated 12.9.2011 & 11.1.2021, within a further period of 90 days. Sd/- (BIBHU DATTA GURU) JUDGE $. Bhilwar