1 CGHC010358732026 2026:CGHC:41317 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPS No. 6938 of 2026 Rajendra Kumar Sharma S/o Arjun Prasad Sharma Aged About 38 Years Lecturer (L.B.) Govt. Higher Secondary School Temri, Block Mungeli, District- Mungeli (C.G.) ... Petitioner(s) versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Secretary, Department Of Panchayat And Rural Development Mantralaya, Mahanadi Bhawan, Nava Raipur, Atal Nagar, District- Raipur (C.G.) 2 - The Secretary, Department Of Education Mantralaya, Mahanadi Bhawan, Nava Raipur, Atal Nagar, District- Raipur (C.G.) 3 - Commissioner- Cum Director, Directorate Of Panchayat Atal Nagar Raipur, District- Raipur (C.G.) 4 - Chief Executive Officer, Zila Panchayat, Mungeli, District- Mungeli (C.G.) 5 - District Education Officer, Mungeli, District- Mungeli (C.G.) SHOAIB ANWAR Digitally signed by SHOAIB ANWAR Date: 2026.09.23 17:54:46 +0530 2 ... Respondent(s) (Cause title taken from CIS) For Petitioner(s) : Shri C. Jayant K. Rao, Advocate For Respondent(s) : Shri Shahil Singh, Panel Lawyer Hon’ble Shri Bibhu Datta Guru, Judge Order on Board 23.09.2026 1. By the present petition, the petitioner has prayed for following reliefs:- “10.1 That, this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to direct the respondent authorities to provide revised pay scale and arrears to the petitioner in the light of the order passed by the Hon'ble Court. 10.2 That, this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to grant any other relief as it may deems fit and appropriate.” 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner was initially appointed in the year 2010. After completion of 8 years of service petitioner became entitled for the benefit of revised pay scale in the year 2018, however, petitioner was not extended the benefit from 2018, but only after absorption, benefit of revised pay scale has been extended to him. It is further contended that 3 according to the decision of Mukesh Kumar Patel v. State of Chhattisgarh (WPS No. 2530 of 2017) decided on 26.11.2017, petitioner is also entitled for the arrears of the revised pay scale, from the date of his entitlement i.e. after completion of 8 years. He submits that petitioner may be permitted to submit fresh representation before the respondent authorities, and direction be issued to respondent No. 4 to consider and take decision on the representation, at the earliest, within specified time frame. 3. On the other hand, learned counsel for the Respondents/State submits that in view of the limited prayer made by the counsel for petitioner, he is having no objection. 4. On due consideration of the submission of counsel for the respective parties, writ petition at this stage is disposed of permitting the petitioner to submit a fresh representation before respondent No. 4 and if such a representation is submitted, the respondent No. 4 shall decide the same, in accordance with law, expeditiously, preferably within a period of 4 months from the date of receipt of representation, keeping in mind the decision of this Court 4 in case of Mukesh Kumar Patel (supra). 5. With the aforesaid observation and direction, this writ petition stands disposed of. Sd/- (Bibhu Datta Guru) Judge Shoaib