Nafr High Court
Case Details
1 / 9 SOURABH BHILWAR Digitally signed by SOURABH BHILWAR Date: 2025.03.21 11:02:24 +0530 2025:CGHC:13214 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPS No. 1876 of 2025 1 - Dasru Ram S/o Kartik Ram Aged About 43 Years R/o Village- Jangla, Post - Matwada, District - Bijapur (C.G.) 2 - Vijiya W/o Sukhram Aged About 41 Years R/o Village- Ketulnar, Post- Mirtur, Bhairamgarh, District- Bijapur (C.G.) 3 - Hanu Ram Yadav S/o Sahdev Yadav Aged About 45 Years R/o House No. 30, Ward No. 9, Pusnar, Bhairamgarh, District- Bijapur (C.G.) 4 - Belki Nag W/o Shridhar Nag Aged About 36 Years R/o Kumharpara, Gram Panchayat-Kutru, Bijapur, District- Bijapur, (C.G.) --- Petitioner(s) versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through Secretary, Tribal Welfare Department, Mahanadi Bhawan, Atal Nagar, Nava Raipur, District Raipur (C.G.) 2 - The Secretary Department Of School Education, Mahanadi Bhawan, Atal Nagar, Nava Raipur, District- Raipur (C.G.) 3 - Commissioner Department Of Scheduled Tribe And Scheduled 2 / 9 Caste Development, Indrawati Bhawan, Nava Raipur, District- Raipur (C.G.) 4 - Collector Bijapur, District- Bijapur (C.G.) 5 - Assistant Commissioner Tribal Welfare Department, Bijapur, District- Bijapur (C.G.) --- Respondent(s) with WPS No. 1877 of 2025 1 - Bachandhar Nag S/o Sukhnath Nag Aged About 40 Years R/o Village- Satwa Bangoli, Post- Nelasnar, Tahsil- Bhairamgarh, District Bijapur, Chhattisgarh. 2 - Jaideyi Yadav D/o Birbal Yadav Aged About 44 Years R/o House No. 231, Village- Pandemurga, Panchayat- Nelasnar, Bhairamgarh, District Bijapur, Chhattisgarh. 3 - Mahadev Kadti S/o Pandu Kadti Aged About 40 Years R/o Village- Patliguda, Panchayat- Toynar, Post- Mirtur, Bhairamgarh, District Bijapur, Chhattisgarh. 4 - Lalita Thakur W/o Bhav Singh Thakur Aged About 40 Years R/o Village- Kundroji, Post- Matwada, Bhairamgarh, District Bijapur, Chhattisgarh. ---Petitioner(s) Versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through Secretary, Tribal Welfare Department, Mahanadi Bhawan, Atal Nagar, Nava Raipur, District Raipur, Chhattisgarh. 3 / 9 2 - The Secretary Department Of School Education, Mahanadi Bhawan, Atal Nagar, Nava Raipur, District Raipur, Chhattisgarh. 3 - Commissioner Department Of Scheduled Tribe And Scheduled Caste Development, Indrawati Bhawan, Nava Raipur, District Raipur, Chhattisgarh. 4 - Collector Bijapur, District Bijapur, Chhattisgarh. 5 - Assistant Commissioner Tribal Welfare Department, Bijapur, District Bijapur, Chhattisgarh. --- Respondent(s) with WPS No. 1883 of 2025 1 - Shyam Chetti Venkateshwar S/o Ramlu Aged About 47 Years R/o Village And Post - Pamed, Bijapur, District - Bijapur Chhattisgarh 2 - Durgam Anand S/o Durgam Samaiya Aged About 46 Years R/o Village And Post - Murdanda, Bhopalpattanam, Bijapur, District - Bijapur Chhattisgarh 3 - Sushila Morla W/o Bhogendra Morla Aged About 39 Years R/o Village And Post - Usoor, Avapalli, Bijapur, District - Bijapur Chhattisgarh 4 - Erola Shankar S/o Erola Samaiya Aged About 46 Years R/o Village - Timapur, House No. 30, Kumbipara, Post - Basagoda, Bijapur, District - Bijapur Chhattisgarh ---Petitioner(s) Versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through Secretary, Tribal Welfare Department, Mahanadi Bhawan, Atal Nagar, Nava Raipur, District - Raipur Chhattisgarh 4 / 9 2 - The Secretary Department Of School Education, Mahanadi Bhawan, Atal Nagar, Nava Raiur, District - Raipur Chhattisgarh 3 - Commissioner Department Of Scheduled Tribe And Scheduled Caste Development, Indrawati Bhawan, Nava Raipur, District Raipur Chhattisgarh 4 - Collector Bijapur, District Bijapur Chhattisgarh 5 - Assistant Commissioner Tribal Welfare Department, Bijapur, District Bijapur Chhattisgarh --- Respondent(s) with WPS No. 1884 of 2025 1 - Jawwa Sammu D/o Jawwa Chandraiya Aged About 40 Years R/ovillage Sankanpalli, Gotepara, Post - Sankalpalli, Bijapur, District Bijapur Chhattisgarh 2 - Nisha Sekh W/o Shekh Ibrahim Aged About 55 Years R/o Thanapara, Tahsil - Usoor, Bijapur, District - Bijapur Chhattisgarh 3 - Dharmaiya Kakem S/o Hungaiya Kakem Aged About 42 Years R/o Village And Post - Murdanda, Bijapur, District - Bijapur Chhattisgarh 4 - Madvi Chilka W/o Madvi Subba Aged About 58 Years R/o Village And Post - Avapalli, Bijapur, District - Bijapur Chhattisgarh 5 - Burka Kanta W/o Venketeshwar Burka Aged About 48 Years R/o Village And Post - Elmidi, Bijapur, District - Bijapur Chhattisgarh ---Petitioner(s) Versus 5 / 9 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through Secretary, Tribal Welfare Department, Mahanadi Bhawan, Atal Nagar, Nava Raipur, District - Raipur Chhattisgarh 2 - The Secretary Department Of School Education, Mahanadi Bhawan, Atal Nagar, Nava Raiur, District - Raipur Chhattisgarh 3 - Commissioner Department Of Scheduled Tribe And Scheduled Caste Development, Indrawati Bhawan, Nava Raipur, District Raipur Chhattisgarh 4 - Collector Bijapur, District Bijapur Chhattisgarh 5 - Assistant Commissioner Tribal Welfare Department, Bijapur, District Bijapur Chhattisgarh --- Respondent(s) with WPS No. 1888 of 2025
Legal Reasoning
1 - Kakem Lingaiya S/o Shri Gujja Aged About 54 Years R/o Village And Post - Elmidi, Bijapur, District- Bijapur (C.G.) 2 - Savaragiri Srinivas S/o Savaragiri Ramanna Aged About 49 Years R/o Kalarpara, Basaguda, Bijapur, District- Bijapur (C.G.) 3 - Sammaiya Modiyam S/o Bablu Aged About 50 Years R/o Village- Chintakonta, Bijapur, District- Bijapur (C.G.) 4 - Jumdi Satyanarayan S/o Jumdi Bakaiya Aged About 48 Years R/o Village- Murdanda, Bijapur, District- Bijapur (C.G.) 5 - Laxmi Chand Gharat S/o Chainuram Gharat Aged About 52 Years R/o Schoolpara, Murkinar, Modakpal, Bijapur, District- Bijapur (C.G.) ---Petitioner(s) 6 / 9 Versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through Secretary, Tribal Welfare Department, Mahanadi Bhawan, Atal Nagar, Nava Raipur, District- Raipur (C.G.) 2 - The Secretary Department Of School Education, Mahanadi Bhawan, Atal Nagar, Nava Raipur, District- Raipur (C.G.) 3 - Commissioner Department Of Scheduled Tribe And Scheduled Caste Development, Indrawati Bhawan, Nava Raipur, District- Raipur (C.G.) 4 - Collector Bijapur, District- Bijapur (C.G.) 5 - Assistant Commissioner Tribal Welfare Department, Bijapur, District- Bijapur (C.G.) --- Respondent(s) with WPS No. 1897 of 2025 1 - Karam Lachha S/o Mutta Karam Aged About 46 Years R/o House No. 9, Schoolpara, Polampalli, Post- Pusbaka, Avapalli, Bijapur, District- Bijapur (C.G.) 2 - Sarke Raju S/o Sarke Chandraiya Aged About 50 Years R/o Village And Post- Basaguda, Bijapur, District- Bijapur (C.G.) 3 - Bhagwati Nair W/o Rabhunath Nair Aged About 45 Years R/o House No. 155, Kotwar Para, Raght Shivir Camp, Basaguda, Bijapur, District- Bijapur (C.G.) 4 - Savaragiri Raju S/o Savaragiri Ramdas Aged About 46 Years R/o Village And Post- Basaguda, Bijapur, District- Bijapur (C.G.) ---Petitioner(s) 7 / 9 Versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through Secretary, Tribal Welfare Department, Mahanadi Bhawan, Atal Nagar, Nava Raipur, District- Raipur (C.G.) 2 - The Secretary Department Of School Education, Mahanadi Bhawan, Atal Nagar, Nava Raipur, District- Raipur (C.G.) 3 - Commissioner Department Of Scheduled Tribe And Scheduled Caste Development, Indrawati Bhawan, Nava Raipur, District Raipur (C.G.) 4 - Collector Bijapur, District Bijapur (C.G.) 5 - Assistant Commissioner Tribal Welfare Department, Bijapur, District Bijapur (C.G.) ... Respondents (Cause title is taken from Case Information System) For Petitioner For Respondents/ State : Mr. Ajit Singh and Mr. Akhilesh Kumar, Govt. : Mr. Syed Majid Ali, Advocate Advocates, Mr. Suyashdhar Badgaiya, Dy. Govt. Advocate, Ms. Nupur Trivedi, Mr. Rishab Bisen and Ms. Poorva Tiwari, Panel Lawyers (HON’BLE SHRI JUSTICE BIBHU DATTA GURU) Order on Board 20/03/2025 1. Since, the issue involved in all the petitions is same, therefore, all the petitions are decided by this common order. 2. The petitioners have filed these writ petitions seeking following reliefs: “10.1 This Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to direct the respondent authorities to consider the case of the 8 / 9 petitioners for permanent status under contingency fund in the light of government circular dated 11.01.2021 (Annexure P/4) as the similarly employee has already been benefited by the respondent authorities. 10.2 That the Hon'ble Court further pleased to grant such other relief(s) as may be deemed fit and proper in the interest of justice.” 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that earlier the State Government has passed various circulars mentioned in circular dated 11.01.2021, however, it was withdrawn. Thereafter, again it was reconsidered and the order of withdrawal of the circular was taken back, as such, all the work-charged employees and the contingency paid employees were being given benefit of regular pay-scale under contingency establishment even without any set- up. It is submitted that on the basis of circular dated 11.01.2021, the other Districts like Bastar, Narayanpur and Bijapur have considered the case and were granted benefit of permanent status, therefore, the petitioners are also entitled for grant of benefit of permanent status in light of circular dated 11.01.2021. 4. Learned State counsel opposes the submission made by learned counsel for the petitioner and submits that the respondent authorities after verifying whether the petitioners are contingency paid employees or not, shall consider their cases, in view of the circular dated 11.01.2021. 5. I have heard learned counsel for parties and perused the documents available on record. 6. Considering the aforesaid aspect of the matter and considering 9 / 9 the arguments advanced by learned counsel for the parties, all the
Decision
writ petitions are disposed off with a direction to the petitioners to file appropriate representation before the respondent authorities stating all the facts which have been shown before this Court and in turn, the respondent authorities shall consider their cases after verifying that whether the petitioners are contingency paid employees or not, in light of circular dated 11.01.2021, and also considering the fact that similar benefits have been granted by various Districts. In the event of filing representation by each of the petitioners within two weeks, the respondents are directed to decide the same in a pragmatic manner, keeping the circular dated 11.01.2021 under consideration. The respondent authorities are directed to decide the representation within a period of four weeks. 7. With this observation, all the writ petitions are disposed of. Sd/- (BIBHU DATTA GURU) JUDGE $. Bhilwar