1 CGHC010255722026 2026:CGHC:36163-DB NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WA No. 737 of 2026 1 - Ramlal Dadsena S/o Kartik Ram Aged About 48 Years Posted As Lecturer, Government High School, Lakhuri, Block Bamhnidih, District- Janjgir-Champa (Chhattisgarh) 2 - Ramesh Kumar Bareth S/o Govind Ram Bareth Aged About 43 Years Posted As Lecturer, Government Higher Secondary School, Kadari, Darang, Block Bamhnidih, District- Janjgir-Champa, (C.G.) 3 - Vinod Kumar Chaube S/o Bhagawat Prasad Aged About 50 Years Posted As Lecturer, Government Middle School, Katnai, P/o Hardi District- Janjgir-Champa (C.G.) 4 - Santosh Kumar Rajak S/o Damodar Prasad Rajak Aged About 44 Years Posted As Lecturer, Government Pre Secondary School, Hanumanth, Darang, Block Bamhnidih, District -Janjgir - Champa, (C.G.) 5 - Ramkripal Dadsena S/o Phirtu Ram Dadsena Aged About 47 Years Posted As Lecturer, Government High School, Podisankar, Block Bamhnidih, District- Janjgir-Champa, (C.G.) 6 - Babu Lal Kashyap S/o Khatha Ram Aged About 50 Years Posted As Lecturer, Government High School, Borsi, Block Bamhnidih, District- Janjgir-Champa, (C.G.) 7 - Dileshwar Prasad Dadsena S/o Motilal Dadsena Aged About 44 Years Posted As Lecturer, Government Higher Secondary School, Semhriya, Block Bamhnidih, District- Janjgir-Champa, (C.G.) 8 - Mahesh Khairwar S/o Sahut Ram Khairwar Aged About 47 Years Posted As Assistant Teacher, Government Primary School, Mauhadih, Block Bamhnidih, District- Janjgir -Champa, (C.G.) ANURADHA TIWARI Digitally signed by ANURADHA TIWARI Date: 2026.08.17 10:28:16 +0530 2 9 - Shiv Kumar Patel S/o Udho Ram Patel Aged About 49 Years Posted As Lecturer, Government High School, Karnoud, Block Bamhnidih, District- Janjgir-Champa, (C.G.) 10 - Sanat Kumar Sidar S/o Bhagat Ram Sidar Aged About 49 Years Posted As Assistant Teacher, Government Primary School, Auradih, Block Bamhnidih, District- Janjgir-Champa, (C.G.) 11 - Kaushal Prasad Sahu S/o Bhaoo Lal Sahu Aged About 45 Years Posted As Teacher, Government Middle School, Bhavreli, Block Bamhnidih, District- Janjgir-Champa, (C.G.) 12 - Pitambar Sahu S/o Narayan Prasad Sahu Aged About 45 Years Posted As Teacher, Government Middle School, Bhadra, Block Bamhnidih, District- Janjgir-Champa, (C.G.) 13 - Bhim Singh Rathore S/o Ambika Prasad Aged About 46 Years Posted As Teacher, Government Middle School, Darribanjar, Block Bamhnidih, District- Janjgir-Champa, (C.G.) 14 - Uttam Lal Sahu S/o Bansi Lal Sahu Aged About 46 Years Posted As Teacher, Government Middle School, Devrani, Block Bamhnidih, District- Janjgir-Champa, (C.G.) 15 - Umesh Kumar Dubey S/o Triyugi Dubey Aged About 49 Years Posted As Teacher, Government Middle School, Semhariya, Block Bamhnidih, District- Janjgir-Champa, (C.G.) 16 - Firat Ram Kanwar S/o Chandu Ram Kanwar Aged About 50 Years Posted As Teacher, Government Middle School, Auradih, Block Bamhnidih, District- Janjgir-Champa, (C.G.) 17 - Antur Ram Urav S/o Baldu Ram Urav Aged About 47 Years Posted As Teacher, Government Middle School, Gadamor, Block Bamhnidih, District- Janjgir-Champa (C.G.) 18 - Gopal Prasad Jaiswal S/o Sarju Prasad Aged About 46 Years Posted As Teacher, Government Middle School, Mauhadih, District- Jangir-Champa, (C.G.) 19 - Bikesh Prasad Kesharwani S/o Ram Krishna Aged About 45 Years Posted As Teacher , Government Middle School, Rivadih, Block Bamhnidih, District- Janjgir-Champa, (C.G.) 3 20 - Ravi Shankar Kumhar S/o Bajarang Lal Aged About 45 Years Posted As Teacher Government Middle School, Mauhadih, Block Bamhnidih, District- Janjgir-Champa, (C.G.) 21 - Shashi Kiran Choubey W/o C.L. Choubey Aged About 46 Years Posted As Teacher Government Middle School, Khapradih, Block Bamhnidih, District- Janjgir-Champa, (C.G.) 22 - Archana Dansena W/o Salik Ram Aged About 45 Years Posted As Teacher Government Middle School, Bamhnidih, Block Bamhnidih, District- Janjgir-Champa, (C.G.) 23 - Tara Chand Pandey S/o Ram Khilawan Pandey Aged About 53 Years Posted As Assistant Teacher, Government Primary School, Hathnewra, Block Bamhnidih,district- Janjgir-Champa, (C.G.) 24 - Pyare Lal Sahu S/o Shri Shyam Lal Sahu Aged About 52 Years Posted As Lecturer, Government Higher Secondary School, Kate Koni Khurd, Tahsil Dabhara, District- Janjgir-Champa, (C.G.) 25 - Brajesh Naik S/o Gulab Singh Aged About 49 Years Posted As Lecturer, Government Higher Secondary School, Reda, Tahsil Dabhara District-Janjgir-Champa, (C.G.) 26 - Keshaw Prasad Patel S/o Shri Manubabu Patel Aged About 52 Years Posted As Lecturer, Government Higher Secondary School, Saradih, Tahsil Dabhara District-Janjgir-Champa, (C.G.) 27 - Smt. Sevati Patel W/o Shri Tarun Kumar Patel Aged About 46 Years Posted As Lecturer, Government Higher Secondary School, Jurtela, Tahsil Dabhara District-Janjgir-Champa, (C.G.) 28 - Dinesh Kumar Patel S/o Shri Var Singh Patel Aged About 49 Years Posted As Lecturer, Kusumjhar, Tahsil Dabhara District-Janjgir-Champa, (C.G.) 29 - Smt. Shashikala Saral W/o Jagdish Prasad Saral Aged About 48 Years Posted As Lecturer, Siriyagarh, Tahsil- Dabhara, District-Janjgir- Champa, (C.G.) 30 - Smt. Geeta Naik W/o Shri Brajesh Naik Aged About 47 Years Posted As Lecturer, Government Higher Secondary School, Kirari, Tahsil Dabhara, District- Janjgir-Champa, (C.G.) 4 31 - Indra Kumar Patel S/o Trilochan Patel Aged About 49 Years Posted As Lecturer, Government Higher Secondary School, Reda, District- Janjgir-Champa, (C.G.) ... Appellants versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through Secretary, School Education Department, Mantralaya, Mahanadi Bhawan, Naya Raipur, District- Raipur, (C.G.) 2 - Secretary Panchayat Department, Mantralaya, Mahanadi Bhawan, Naya Raipur, District- Raipur, (C.G.) 3 - Chief Executive Officer Zila Panchayat Janjgir-Champa, District- Janjgir-Champa, (C.G.) 4 - District Education Officer Janjgir Champa, District- Janjgir-Champa, (C.G.) 5 - Joint Director Treasury Accounts And Pension Department, Janjgir- Champa, District-Janjgir-Champa, (C.G.) 6 - State Of Madhya Pradesh Through Secretary School Education Department Mantralaya, Vallabh Bhawan Bhopal, (M.P.) 7 - Santosh Kumar Dewangan S/o Arjun Lal Dewangan Aged About 45 Years, Posted As Lecturer, Government Middle School, Birkoni, Tehsil Akaltara, District- Janjgir-Champa, (C.G.) 8 - Girvar Kumar Sandil S/o Ramkhilawan Sandila, Aged About 48 Years, Posted As Lecturer, Government Higher Secondary School, Nariyara, Tahsil Akaltara, District-Janjgir-Champa (C.G.) 9 - Makhan Lal Rathore S/o Hardev Lal Rathore Aged About 51 Years, Posted As Lecturer, Government Middle School, Darri Banjar, Block Bamhnidih, District- Janjgir-Champa, (C.G.) 10 - Pratap Singh Kanwar S/o Balwant Singh Kanwar Aged About 49 Years, Posted As Teacher, Government Middle School Choriya, Block Bamhnidih, District- Janjgir Champa (C.G.) 11 - Kalpana Chouhan W/o Lakhan Lal Chauhan Aged About 48 Years, Posted As Teacher, Government Middle School, Jharna, Block Bamhnidih, District- Janjgir-Champa, (C.G.) ... Respondents 5 (Cause-title taken from Case Information System) For Appellants : Mr. Anup Majumdar, Senior Advocate assisted by Mr. Prateek Singh Thakur, Advocate For Respondent-State : Mr. Prasun Kumar Bhaduri, Deputy Advocate General Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Hon'ble Shri Ravindra Kumar Agrawal , Judge Judgment on Board Per Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice 14.08.2026 1. Heard Mr. Anup Majumdar, learned Senior Counsel assisted by Mr. Prateek Singh Thakur, learned counsel for the appellants as well as Mr. Prasun Kumar Bhaduri, learned Deputy Advocate General, appearing for the State on I.A. No.01, which is an condonation of delay of 114 days in preferring the appeal. 2. For the grounds assigned in the application (I.A. No.01), the same is allowed. Delay of 114 days in filing the writ appeal is hereby condoned. 3. The appellants have filed this writ appeal against the order dated 23.01.2026 passed by the learned Single Judge in WPS No.2930/2021 and connected matters, by which the learned Single Judge has disposed of the writ petition filed by the writ petitioners. 4. Learned counsel appearing for the parties submit that the issue involved in this writ appeal has already been considered and 6 decided by this Court vide judgment dated 23.04.2026 passed in WA No.325/2026 (The State of Chhattisgarh vs. Rajendra Prasad Patel), wherein this Court held as under:- “18. A careful reading of paragraphs 45 to 47 of the impugned order would reveal that the learned Single Judge has consciously refrained from issuing any positive mandamus either granting or denying pensionary benefits to the respondents. The direction issued is neither in the nature of conferring any substantive benefit nor does it unsettle any existing policy. On the contrary, the learned Single Judge has adopted a restrained and balanced approach by requiring the State Government to take a conscious, reasoned, and policy-based decision on the issue. 21. It is significant to note that the controversy in the present case arises in a peculiar factual backdrop, where the respondents initially served as Shikshakarmis and were subsequently absorbed into regular government service. The question as to whether, and to what extent, the pre-absorption service ought to be reckoned for pensionary purposes involves consideration of multiple factors, including continuity of service, nature of duties, administrative control, and the constitutional mandate of equality under Articles 14 and 16 of the Constitution of India. These are matters which squarely fall within the domain of executive policy. 7 22. The learned Single Judge, in our considered view, has rightly refrained from adjudicating upon such policy matters and has instead directed the competent authority to undertake an informed decision-making process. The clarification contained in paragraph 46 of the impugned order explicitly preserves the prerogative of the State in matters of policy formulation, thereby ensuring that there is no judicial overreach. 23. The contention of the appellants/State that the impugned direction amounts to revival of a stale or concluded issue is also misplaced. The direction issued is not for consideration of an individual or belated representation so as to attract the ratio of M.K. Sarkar (supra). Rather, it is a direction to the State to address a broader, systemic issue affecting a class of employees, which has continuing civil consequences and has led to recurring litigation. Such a direction, in our opinion, cannot be equated with the “consideration jurisprudence” deprecated by the Hon’ble Supreme Court. In fact, the requirement of passing a reasoned and speaking order within a stipulated timeframe advances the cause of transparency and accountability in governance, and ensures that the issue is examined at the appropriate level on relevant considerations. No prejudice, much less irreparable prejudice, is caused to the appellants by such a direction. 24. As regards the submission pertaining to 8 judicial discipline and binding precedent, we find that the learned Single Judge has not taken any view in derogation of the judgment rendered by the Division Bench of this Court in Har Narayan Yadav (supra). The learned Single Judge has neither overruled nor disregarded the said judgment, but has merely directed reconsideration of the issue in light of existing legal and factual parameters. Therefore, the argument founded on alleged breach of judicial discipline is misconceived. 25. Similarly, the plea based on delay and laches, as well as the reliance placed upon the affidavit of the Secretary, Department of Finance, are matters which can appropriately be considered by the State Government while undertaking the exercise directed by the learned Single Judge. The impugned order does not foreclose any such contention and leaves it open to the State to take an appropriate decision in accordance with law. 26. We also find merit in the submission advanced on behalf of the respondents that the impugned order strikes a balance between judicial restraint and the need to ensure fairness in State action. The learned Single Judge has neither encroached upon the policy domain nor abdicated judicial responsibility, but has facilitated a lawful and structured decision- making process. 27. In view of the aforesaid discussion, we are of the considered opinion that the impugned 9 order passed by the learned Single Judge does not suffer from any legal infirmity warranting interference in exercise of appellate jurisdiction. 28. For the foregoing reasons, the writ appeal being devoid of merit is liable to be and is hereby dismissed . No order as to costs.” They further submitted that since the facts and issue involved in the present case is identical to that of WA No.325/2026, this appeal may also be dismissed in the same terms. 5. Having considered the rival submissions made by learned counsel for the parties and having gone through the materials on record, it is evident that the facts and issue involved in this appeal is identical to WA No.325/2026, this Court deems it appropriate not to take a view other than what has been taken in WA No.325/2026. 6. Accordingly, the present appeal is dismissed in terms of the order dated 23.04.2026 passed in WA No.325/2026. Sd/- Sd/- (Ravindra Kumar Agrawal) (Ramesh Sinha) Judge Chief Justice Anu