1 CGHC010332762026 2026:CGHC:38297 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPS No. 6369 of 2026 1. Rajkumar Yadav S/o Late Shri Cheduram Yadav Aged About 63 Years Presently Retired From The Post Of Time Keeper, Office Of Executive Engineer, R.E.S. Division Janjgir District Janjgir Champa (C.G.) 2. Shivkumar Yadav S/o Shri S.P. Yadav, Aged About 60 Years Occupation Service Presently Posted As Time Keeper, R.E.S. Division Janjgir District Janjgir Champa (C.G.) 3. Bhuwneshwar Prasad Sahu S/o Late Jaitram Sahu, Aged About 61 Years Occupation Service Presently Posted As Time Keeper, R.E.S. Division Janjgir District Janjgir Champa (C.G.) 4. Komal Prasad Sahu S/o Late Horilal Sahu, Aged About 60 Years Occupation Service Presently Posted As Time Keeper, R.E.S. Division Janjgir District Janjgir Champa (C.G.) ... Petitioner(s) versus 1. State Of Chhattisgarh Through Secretary, Department Of Panchayat And Rural Development Mahanadi Bhawan Mantralaya, Nawa Raipur, Atal Nagar, District -Raipur (C.G.) 2. Engineer In Chief, Rural Engineering Severcies, Vikas Bhawan Sector 19, Nawa Raipur, Atal Nagar District Raipur (C.G.) 3. Chief Engineer, Rural Engineering Severcies, Vikas Bhawan Sector 19, Nawa Raipur, Atal Nagar District Raipur (C.G.) 4. Superintendent Engineer, Rural Engineering Severcies, Bilaspur District -Bilaspur (C.G.) 5. Executive Engineer, R.E.S. Division Janjgir, District -Janjgir Champa (C.G.) JYOTI SHARMA Digitally signed by JYOTI SHARMA Date: 2026.09.01 10:51:47 +0530 2 6. Joint Director, Accounts Treasury And Pension Bilaspur Division, District -Bilaspur (C.G.) ... Respondent(s) For Petitioners : Mr. Sourabh Sahu, Advocate. For Respondents/State : Ms. Apurva Nigam, Panel Lawyer. Hon’ble Shri Bibhu Datta Guru, Judge Order on Board 31/08/2026 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 call for the records pertaining to the case of petitioners. 10.2 That, this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to respondent writ/order/direction authorities to grant the benefits of higher pay scale to the in-service petitioners, revise the pension of the retired petitioners as per the Gazette Notification dated 14/10/1982. 10.3 That, this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to issue writ/order/direction authorities to pay arrears of salary and pension to the petitioners. 10.4 That, this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to issue to writ/order/direction the respondent authorities to remove the anomaly occurred in the service of the petitioners. 10.5 That, this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to issue writ/order/direction similar to the order dated 17/07/2026 passed in WPS No. 5405 of 2026 directing the respondent authorities to consider and decide the fresh representation in the light of the gazette notification dated 14.10.1982 expeditiously preferably within a period of six months from the date of 3 receipt/production of a certified copy of this order. 10.6 Any other relief(s)/ order(s)/ direction(s) in favor of petitioners, which this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case, in the interest of justice. 10.7 Cost of the petition.” 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 4 Bench in Laxmi Narayan Upadhyay v. State of M.P., 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 Jyoti