1 CGHC010267062026 2026:CGHC:30371 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPS No. 5405 of 2026 1 - Aasharam Aditya S/o Late Sukharuram Aditya Aged About 59 Years Working On The Post Of Sthal Sahayak / Time Keeper Posted At Gramin Yantriki Sewa (R E S) Sub Division Raigarh District- Raigarh (C.G.) R/o H.N. 302 Kabir Chowk Ward No.34 Nawapara Raigarh Tahsil And District Raigarh (C.G.) 2 - Krishna Kumar Pradhan S/o Puni Lal Pradhan Aged About 59 Years Working On The Post Of Sthal Sahayak / Time Keeper Posted At Gramin Yantriki Sewa (R E S) Sub Division Tamnar District- Raigarh (C.G.) R/o H.N.19 Village Lamdand Post- Tolge Tahsil Lailunga District- Raigarh (C.G.) 3 - Devraj Ram Yadav S/o Late Chandrasekhar Yadav Aged About 64 Years Retired Sthal Sahayak Time Keeper Posted At Gramin Yantriki Sewa (R E S) Sub Division Batouli District- Surguja (C.G.) R/o H. N. 27 Ward No.02 Village Budhadand Post- Musgutri Tahsil Bagicha District- Jashpur (C.G.) ... Petitioners versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through- Secretary, Panchayat And Rural Development Department Mahanadi Bhawan Mantralaya Atal Nagar, New Raipur District- Raipur (C.G.) 2 - Engineer In Chief Rural Engineering Service (Gramin Yantriki Sewa ) Vikas Ayukat Karyalay Vikas Bhawan Sector 19 Nawa Raipur Atal Nagar District- Raipur (C.G.) AMARDEEP CHOUBEY Digitally signed by AMARDEEP CHOUBEY Date: 2026.07.17 18:26:23 +0530 2 3 - Executive Engineer Rural Engineering Service (Gramin Yantriki Sewa) Division Raigarh District Raigarh (C.G.) 4 - Executive Engineer Rural Engineering Service (Gramin Yantriki Sewa) Division Ambikapur District- Surguja (C.G.) 5 - Joint Director Pension And Account Treasury Department Bilaspur Division District- Bilaspur (C.G.) 6 - Joint Director Pension And Account Treasury Department Surguja Division District- Surguja (C.G.) ... Respondents For Petitioners : Mr. F.S. Khare, Advocate. For Respondents/State : Mr. Luv Sharma, Panel Lawyer. Hon’ble Shri Bibhu Datta Guru, Judge Order on Board 17/07/2026 1. By the present writ petition, the petitioners have prayed for following relief:- “10.1 That this Hon'ble court may kindly be pleased to allow the writ petition and be pleased to direct the respondents to remove the anomaly accord in the service of petitioners. 10.2 That, the Hon'ble Curt may kindly be pleased to direct the respondents to grant pay scale published in the Gazette dated 14.10.1982 and also direct to pay the arrears to the petitioners from their initial date of appointment. 10.3 That, if the Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper be pleased to dispose of this writ petition granting same relief of making fresh representation to the competent authority, which is granted in W.P.S. No. 4989/2026 disposed of on 02.07.2026 (P/11). 10.4 That, this Hon'ble court may kindly be call for the 3 records for its kind perusal which relates to petitioner's matter. 10.5 Any other relief, which this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper, may also be passed in favour of the petitioners.” 2. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioners submitted that in similarly situated facts and the question of law, a batch of the writ petition, the leading case of which was Writ Petition (S) No. 2904 of 2005 [Dwarikadas Vaishnav & another Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh (now Chhattisgarh) and others] has been considered and decided by the Coordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated 05.12.2012, in which, the petitioners, in those cases, have been granted liberty to file a fresh representation before competent authority, therefore, this petition may also be disposed of in light of that order directing the respondents- Competent Authority to consider the case of the petitioners for revision of his pay scale in accordance with the Notification dated 14.10.1992 (which was modified subsequently as 14.10.1982) issued by State of Madhya Pradesh, as the petitioners were earlier working as daily wage employee and subsequently, their services were regularized. 3. Learned counsel appearing for the State/respondents would submit that earlier the respondent/State had already considered the issue of the petitioners in the light of the judgment passed by State Administrative Tribunal, Gwalior Bench in Laxmi Narayan Upadhyay v. State of M.P., 4 however, he submits that if the petitioners file a fresh representation, the State will consider their case in light of the notification as mentioned herein above 4. In view of the above submissions made by the parties, this petition is disposed of. If the petitioners file a fresh representation before the competent authority, the same shall be considered and decided by the competent authority in light of the aforesaid notification expeditiously preferably within a period of six months from the date of receipt/production of a certified copy of this order. 5. With the aforesaid observation, the writ petition is disposed of. SD/- (Bibhu Datta Guru) Judge Amardeep