1 CGHC010323472026 2026:CGHC:37293 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPS No. 6249 of 2026 1 - Mukesh Kumar Yadav S/o- Late Premlal Yadav, Aged About 66 Years R/o- Aadarsh Nagar, Mowa, District- Raipur, Chhattisgarh. 2 - Bhajman Jagat S/o- Late Ratiram Jagat Aged About 34 Years R/o- H.No. 12/942, Near Masjid Road, Koteshwar Nagar, Raipur District- Raipur, Chhattisgarh. 3 - Manish Dewangan S/o- Late Mahaveer Dewangan Aged About 41 Years R/o- Shikshak Nagar, District- Gariyaband, Chhattisgarh. 4 - Neeraj Kumar Soni S/o- Late Mukund Soni Aged About 44 Years R/o- Tulsi Nagar, Ward No. 9, Gudhiyari, District- Raipur, Chhattisgarh. 5 - Nilesh Kumar Yadav S/o- Late Purshottam Yadav Aged About 37 Years R/o- Ward No.1, P.O. Jeora Sirsa, Durg, District- Durg Chhattisgarh SHOAIB ANWAR Digitally signed by SHOAIB ANWAR Date: 2026.08.20 17:14:32 +0530 2 6 - Neeraj Sahu S/o- Late Ratanlal Sahu Aged About 30 Years R/o- Ward No. 1, Subhash Para, Raipur, District- Raipur Chhattisgarh. 7 - Rani Verma D/o- Late Shri Thakur Ram Verma, Aged About 45 Years R/o- Ward No. 5, Ranitarai, Durg, District- Durg, Chhattisgarh ... Petitioner(s) versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Chief Secretary, Govt. Of Chhattisgarh, Mahanadi Bhawan, Atal Nagar, Nava Raipur, Chhattisgarh. 2 - The Secretary, General Administration Department, Govt. Of Chhattisgarh, Mahanadi Bhawan, Atal Nagar, Nava Raipur, Chhattisgarh. 3 - The Secretary, Water- Resource Department, Govt. Of Chhattisgarh, Mahanadi Bhawan, Atal Nagar, Nava Raipur, Chhattisgarh. 4 - The Secretary, Department Of Finance, Accounts And Treasury, Govt. Of Chhattisgarh, Mahanadi Bhawan, Atal Nagar, Nava Raipur, Chhattisgarh. 5 - The Executive Engineer, Water Resource Department, Division No.1 Raipur, District- Raipur, Chhattisgarh. ... Respondent(s) (Cause title taken from CIS) 3 For Petitioner(s) : Shri Kaustubh Singh Thakur, Advocate For Respondent(s) : Shri K.G. Yadav, Dy. G.A. Hon’ble Shri Bibhu Datta Guru, Judge Order on Board 20.08.2026 Heard. 1. The petitioners have >lled, this petition seeking the following reliefs:- “(i) That, this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to allow the present writ petition preferred by the petitioner and direct the respondent authorities to remove the anomaly occurred in the service of the petitioner. (ii) That, this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to direct the Respondent authorities to grant pay scale published in the gazette noti>cation dated 14.10.1982. (iii) Alternatively, this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to issue appropriate writ/order/direction similar to order passed in WPS No. 3358 of 2025 in case of Bhojram Nayak and Others v. State of 4 Chhattisgarh granting liberty to petitioner to >le a fresh representation and further directing the respondent authorities to consider the same in light of gazette noti>cation dated 14.10.1982. (iv) That any other relief which this Hon'ble Court may deem >t and necessary in the interest of justice may kindly be awarded. (v) That. the Cost of the petition may kindly also be awarded to the petitioner.” 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 >le 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 their pay scale in 5 accordance with the Noti>cation dated 14.10.1992 (which was modi>ed subsequently as 14.10.1982) issued by State of Madhya Pradesh, as the petitioners were earlier working as daily wage employees 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., however, he submits that if the petitioners >le a fresh representation, the State will consider their case in light of the noti>cation as mentioned above. 4. In view of the above submissions made by the parties, this petition is disposed of. If the petitioners >le a fresh representation before the competent authority, the same shall be considered and decided by the competent authority in light of the aforesaid noti>cation expeditiously preferably within a period of six months from the date of receipt/production of a certi>ed copy of this order. 6 5. With the aforesaid observation, the writ petition is disposed of. Sd/- (Bibhu Datta Guru) JUDGE Shoaib