1 2026:CGHC:18267 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPS No. 3460 of 2026 1 - Ramlochan Vaishnav S/o Manbodh Vaishnav Aged About 74 Years Retired Time Keeper, R/o House No. 101, Opposite Shiv Temple, Nootan Chowk Sarkanda, Bilaspur, Tehsil And District Bilaspur Chhattisgarh 2 - Shiv Kumar Sahu S/o Badri Prasad Sahu, Aged About 78 Years Retired Time Keeper, R/o Ward No. 48, Purana Sarkanda Mata Chaura, Bilaspur, Tehsil And District Bilaspur Chhattisgarh 3 - Smt. Jaya Thakur W/o Late Yashwant Kumar Thakur Aged About 70 Years R/o Bandwapara Bilaspur, Tehsil And District Bilaspur Chhattisgarh 4 - Ramkumar Gupta S/o Heeralal Gupta Aged About 72 Years Retired Time Keeper, R/o Ward No. 4, Adarsh Nagar, Sirgitti, Bilaspur, Tehsil And District Bilaspur Chhattisgarh 5 - Tikeshwar Prasad Pandey S/o Ram Prasad Pandey Aged About 74 Years Retired Time Keeper, R/o Village Munda, Post Lahod, District Balodabazar-Bhatapara Chhattisgarh ... Petitioner(s) versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Secretary, Water Resources Department Mahanadi Bhawan Atal Nagar Raipur Chhattisgarh 2 - Engineer In Chief Water Resources Department Raipur District Raipur Chhattisgarh RAVI SHANKAR MANDAVI Digitally signed by RAVI SHANKAR MANDAVI Date: 2026.04.28 13:29:30 +0530 2 3 - Chief Engineer Hasdev Kachhar Water Resource Department Bilaspur, District Bilaspur Chhattisgarh 4 - Executive Engineer Kharang Water Resource Division Bilaspur, District Bilaspur Chhattisgarh 5 - Joint Director Hydrology Water Resource Division No. 4 Raipur, Under The Chief Engineer Mahanadi Godawari Kachhar Water Resource Division Raipur, District Raipur Chhattisgarh ... Respondent(s) (Cause title is taken from CIS) For Petitioners : Mr. Swapnil Keshari, Advocate appears on behalf of Mr. Hemant Kesharwani, Advocate For Respondents-State : Mr. Avinash Singh, Govt. Advocate SB: Hon'ble Shri Parth Prateem Sahu, Judge Order on Board 22/04/2026 1. Petitioners have filed this writ petition seeking following reliefs:- “10.1. That, this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to call for all the records pertaining to the case. 10.2 That, this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to issue writ/order/direction to the respondent 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 the respondent authorities to pay arrears of salary and pension to the petitioners. 10.4 That, this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to issue writ/order/direction to 3 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 passed on 18.07.2024 in WPS No. 6355/2014 and order dated 13.11.2024 passed in WPS No. 7312/2024 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 receipt/ production of a certified copy of this order. 10.6. That any other relief/order which may be deem fit and just in the facts and circumstances of the case may kindly be granted.” 2. Learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that in similar nature of cases in 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) issued by 4 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., 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 aforementioned notification expeditiously preferably within a period of six months from the date of receipt/production of a representation. 5. With the aforesaid observation and direction, this writ petition stands disposed of. Sd/- (Parth Prateem Sahu) Judge Ravi Mandavi