1 CGHC010272012021 2026:CGHC:29236 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPS No. 6205 of 2021 1 - Jai Shankar Naik S/o Bhagwan Naik, Aged About 59 Years Occupation Dresser, Presently Posted At E.S.I.S. Supela, Bhilai Centre, District Durg (Chhattisgarh) R/o Street No. 80, Block No. 3/f, Sector-6, Bhilai, District Durg (Chhattisgarh), District : Durg, Chhattisgarh ... Petitioner versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Collector, Department Of Labour, Mahanadi Bhawan, Atal Nagar, Naya Raipur, District Raipur Chhattisgarh., District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh 2 - Director, Directorate Employee, State Insurance Services, Block-3, 2nd Floor, Indravati Bhawan, Nava Raipur, District Raipur Chhattisgarh, District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh 3 - Deputy Director, Employee, State Insurance Services, Block-3, 2nd Floor, Indravati Bhawan, Nava Raipur, District Raipur Chhattisgarh., District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh ---- Respondents For petitioner : Mr. Sudhir Kumar Shyam, Advocate holding the brief of Mr. P.K. Patel, Advocate For State : Mr. Ajay Kumrani, PL Hon'ble Shri Justice Rakesh Mohan Pandey Order on Board 13.07.2026 1. The petitioner has filed this petition seeking following relief (s) : “10.1 That, this Hon'ble Court, may kindly call for the entire record in relates to the case of the petitioner. 10.2 That, this Hon'ble Court, may kindly be -2- pleased to issued a writ / or writs / order / or orders / to direct the respondent's authorities, to grant grade pay of Rs. 1900/- in instead of grade pay Rs. 1800/- to the petitioner, according to equal grade pay 1900/- granted by the State of Madhya Pradesh as well as same cadre employee working with the Health and Family Welfare Department of the Chhattisgarh State, in the interest of justice. 10.3 That, any other relief, this Hon'ble Court, deem fit and proper may also kindly be granted to the petitioner, in the interest of justice.” 2. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would submit that initially, the petitioner was appointed on the post of Dresser vide order dated 10.05.1989 under the respondent authorities. He would further submit that initial pay scale of the petitioner was Rs.775-1209/- and at present, he is receiving grade pay of Rs.1800/-, whereas, the Dressers appointed in the State of Madhya Pradesh are getting Grade pay of Rs.1900/-. It is argued that the nature of work and the responsibilities are almost same in both States and therefore, the petitioner is entitled to higher grade pay equivalent to the grade pay which is being paid to the Dressers of the State of Madhya Pradesh. It is contended that a representation was submitted by the Union but till date, no decision has been taken. He would contend that the petitioner may be granted liberty to make a detailed representation before respondent No.2 and in turn, said authority may be directed to decide it expeditiously strictly in accordance with law. 3. On the other hand, Mr. Kumrani, learned Panel Lawyer appearing for the State/respondents would oppose the submissions. He would submit that the petitioner has claimed pay parity with the 3 employees employed in the State of Madhya Pradesh. He would further submit that the working conditions and the relevant factors in both States are entirely different and thus, the petition is misconceived and deserves to be dismissed. 4. Heard the learned counsel appearing for the parties and perused the documents placed on record. 5. Having considered the limited prayer made by the petitioner, this petition is disposed of reserving liberty in favour of the petitioner to make a detailed representation before respondent No.2 and in turn, said authority is directed to pass appropriate order preferably within a period of 150 days from receipt of copy of this order. 6. It is made clear that this Court has not expressed any opinion on the merits of the case. 7. With the aforesaid observation(s)/direction(s), the present petition is disposed of at admission stage. 8. Pending application, if any, stand disposed of. Sd/- (Rakesh Mohan Pandey) Judge Rekha