Surajpur, Chhattisgarh v. State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Secretary, Department Of Panchayat And Rural Development Mahanadi Bhawan
Case Details
1 2025:CGHC:3433 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPS No. 8740 of 2019 • 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. Ramnarayan Singh S/o Shri Jag Sai Aged About 44 Years R/o Village Vrindaban Janpad Panchayat Premnagar, District Surajpur, Chhattisgarh, District : Surajpur, Chhattisgarh --- Petitioner(s) versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Secretary, Department Of Panchayat And Rural Development Mahanadi Bhawan, Atal Nagar Raipur, District Raipur, Chhattisgarh, District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh The Collector Surajpur, District Surajpur, Chhattisgarh, District : Surajpur, Chhattisgarh The Chief Executive Officer, Zila Panchayat Surajpur, District Surajpur, Chhattisgarh, District : Surajpur, Chhattisgarh The Chief Executive Officer Zila Panchayat Balrampur, District Balrampur Ramanujganj, Chhattisgarh, District : Balrampur, Chhattisgarh Chief Executive Officer, Zila Panchayat (Surguja) Ambikapur, District Surguja, Chhattisgarh, District : Surguja (Ambikapur), Chhattisgar The Chief Executive Officer Janpad Panchayat Premnagar, District Surajpur, Chhattisgarh, District : Surajpur, Chhattisgarh Pahluram Kushwaha S/o Dashram Aged About 24 Years R/o Village Sarna (Nauli) Post Raghunathnagar, District Surguja, Chhattisgarh, District : Surguja (Ambikapur), Chhattisgarh
Legal Reasoning
Harishchand Prasad Gautam S/o Shri Ram Prasad Aged About 41 Years R/o Raghunathnagar, Police Station Raghunathnagar, Tahsil Wadrafnagar, District Balrampur Ramanujganj, Chhattisgarh, District : Balrampur, Chhattisgarh 2 9. Lal Bahadur S/o Late Munnalal Aged About 37 Years R/o Village Sarna, Police Station Raghunathnagar, District Balrampur Ramanujganj, Chhattisgarh, District : Balrampur, Chhattisgarh 10. Tarkeshwar Yadav S/o Ram Vilas Aged About 43 Years R/o Village Rampur, Police Station Chalgali, District Balrampur Ramanujganj, Chhattisgarh, District : Balrampur, Chhattisgarh 11. Baldeo Das S/o Shri Manglu Das Aged About 41 Years R/o Village Manpur Tahsil Wadrafnagar, Police Station Raghunathnagar, District Balrampur Ramanujganj, Chhattisgarh, District : Balrampur, Chhattisgarh. 12. Ram Kumar Yadav S/o Laxmi Narayan Yadav Aged About 52 Years R/o Virendranagar, Tahsil Wadrafnagar, District Balrampur Ramanujganj, Chhattisgarh, District : Balrampur, Chhattisgarh. Police Station Virendranagar, 13. Mahendra Kumar Yadav S/o Jagdev Ram Aged About 41 Years R/o Balrampur Village Vinayakpur, Ramanujganj, Chhattisgarh, District : Balrampur, Chhattisgarh Manoharpur, District Post 14. Deepak Prasad S/o Krishna Prasad Aged About 44 Years R/o Village Kalikapur, Janpad Panchayat Ramchandrapur, District Balrampur Ramanujganj, Chhattisgarh, District : Balrampur, Chhattisgarh --- Respondent(s) WPS No. 9030 of 2019 • Sukhlal S/o. Shri Dal Sai Aged About 44 Years R/o. Village- District-Surajpur Janpad Panchyat-Premnagar Bhagwanpur Chhattisgarh, District : Surajpur, Chhattisgarh --- Petitioner(s) Versus 1. 2. 3. State Of Chhattisgarh Through- The Secretary, Department Of Panchayat And Rural Development Mahanadi Bhawan, Atalnagar Raipur District Raipur Chhattisgarh, District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh The Collector Surajpur District -Surajpur Chhattisgarh, District : Surajpur, Chhattisgarh The Chief Executive Officer Zila Panchayat- Surajpur District- Surajpur Chhattisgarh, District : Surajpur, Chhattisgarh --- Respondent(s) 3 WPS No. 9523 of 2019 • 1. 2. 3. • 1. 2. 3. • Shivkumar S/o Shri Budhram Aged About 44 Years R/o Village Dhanuharpara Bhagwanpur Janpad Panchayat Premnagar District Surajpur Chhattisgarh, District : Surajpur, Chhattisgarh --- Petitioner(s) Versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Secretary, Department Of Panchayat And Rural Development Mahanadi Bhawan, Atalnagar Raipur, District Raipur Chhattisgarh, District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh The Collector Surajpur District Surajpur Chhattisgarh, District : Surajpur, Chhattisgarh The Chief Executive Officer, Zila Panchayat Surajpur District Surajpur Chhattisgarh, District : Surajpur, Chhattisgarh --- Respondent(s) WPS No. 9522 of 2019 Shyamlal S/o Late Ramvtar Aged About 42 Years R/o Village - Baigapara Chandannagar, Janpad Panchayat Premnagar, District Surajpur Chhattisgarh., District : Surajpur, Chhattisgarh --- Petitioner(s) Versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Secretary, Department Of Panchayat And Rural Development Mahanadi Bhawan, Atalnagar Raipur, District Raipur Chhattisgarh., District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh The Collector Surajpur, District Surajpur Chhattisgarh., District : Surajpur, Chhattisgarh The Chief Executive Officer Zila Panchayat Surajpur, District Surajpur Chhattisgarh., District : Surajpur, Chhattisgarh --- Respondent(s) WPS No. 9505 of 2019 Dhaneshwar Prasad S/o Late Karmen Aged About 44 Years R/o Village Parvatipur, Janpad Panchayat Premnagar, District Surajpur Chhattisgarh, District : Surajpur, Chhattisgarh --- Petitioner(s) Versus 4 1. 2. 3. • State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Secretary, Department Of Panchayat And Rural Development, Mantralaya, Mahanadi Bhawan, Atal Nagar, Nawa Raipur District Raipur Chhattisgarh, District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh The Collector Surajpur District Surajpur Chhattisgarh, District : Surajpur, Chhattisgarh The Chief Executive Officer Zila Panchayat Surajpur District Surajpur Chhattisgarh, District : Surajpur, Chhattisgarh --- Respondent(s) WPS No. 8636 of 2019 Nandkeshwar Das S/o Late Baldev Das Aged About 42 Years R/o Village Nawapara Khurd Janpad Panchayat Premnagr District Surajpur Chhattisgarh, District : Surajpur, Chhattisgarh --- Petitioner(s) Versus 1. State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Secretary, Department Of Panchayat And Rural Development Mahanadi Bhawan, Atalnagar Raipur, District Raipur Chhattsigarh, District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh 2. 3. 4. The Collector, Surajpur, District Surajpur Chhattisgarh, District : Surajpur, Chhattisgarh The Chief Executive Officer, Zila Panchayat Surajpur District Surajpur Chhattisgarh, District : Surajpur, Chhattisgarh The Chief Executive Officer, Zila Panchayat Balrampur District Balrampur Ramanujganj Chhattisgarh, District : Balrampur, Chhattisgarh 5. Chief Executive Officer, Zila Panchayat (Surguja) Amikapur District Surguja Chhattisgarh, District : Surguja (Ambikapur), Chhattisgarh 6. The Chief Executive Officer, Janpad Panchayat Premnagar District Surjapur Chhattisgarh, District : Surajpur, Chhattisgarh 7. Pahluram Kushwaha S/o Dashram Aged About 24 Years R/o Village Sarna (Nauli) Post Raghunathnagar District Surguja Chhattisgarh, District : Surguja (Ambikapur), Chhattisgarh 8. Harishchand Prasad Gautam S/o Shri Ram Prasad Aged About 41 Years R/o Raghunathnagar P.S. Raghunathnagar Tahsil Wadrafnagar District Balrampur Ramanujganj Chhattisgarh, District : Balrampur, Chhattisgarh 5 9. Lal Bahadur S/o Late Munnalal Aged About 37 Years R/o Village Sarna, P.S. Raghunathnagar District Balrampur Ramanujganj Chhattisgarh, District : Balrampur, Chhattisgarh 10. Tarkeshwar Yadav S/o Ram Vilas Aged About 43 Years R/o Village Rampur P.S. Chalgali District Balrampur Ramanujganj Chhattisgarh 11. Baldeo Das S/o Shri Manglu Das Aged About 41 Years R/o Village Manpur Tahsil Wadrafnagar P.- Raghunathnagar District Balrampur Ramanujganj Chhattisgarh, District : Balrampur, Chhattisgarh 12. Ram Kumar Yadav S/o Laxmi Narayan Yadav Aged About 52 Years R/o Virendranagar P.S. Virendranagar Tahsil Wadrafnagar District Balrampur Ramanujganj Chhattisgarh, District : Balrampur, Chhattisgarh 13. Mahendra Kumar Yadav S/o Jagdev Ram Aged About 41 Years R/o Balrampur Village Vinayakpur Post Ramanujganj Chhattisgarh, District : Balrampur, Chhattisgarh Manoharpur District 14. Deepak Prasad S/o Krishna Prasad Aged About 44 Years R/o Village Kalikapur Janpad Panchayat Ramchandrapur District Balrampur Ramanujganj Chhattisgarh, District : Balrampur, Chhattisgarh --- Respondent(s) WPS No. 10504 of 2019 • Thakur Ram S/o Late Prem Sai Aged About 44 Years R/o Village - Janardanpur Janpad Panchayat- Premnagr District - Surajpur Chhattisgarh, District : Surajpur, Chhattisgarh --- Petitioner(s) Versus 1. State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Secretary, Department Of Panchayat And Rural Development Mahanadi Bhawan, Atal Nagar Raipur, District Raipur Chhattisgarh, District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh 2. 3. The Collector Surajpur District Surajpur Chhattisgarh, District : Surajpur, Chhattisgarh The Chief Executive Officer Zila Panchayat- Surajpur District Surajpur Chhattisgarh, District : Surajpur, Chhattisgarh --- Respondent(s) 6 WPS No. 8748 of 2019 • Tekram Kurrey S/o Shri Vrinda Ram Aged About 42 Years R/o Village Kedarpur, Janpad Panchayat Premnagar, District Surajpur, Chhattisgarh., District : Surajpur, Chhattisgarh --- Petitioner(s) Versus 1. State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Secretary, Department Of Panchayat And Rural Development Mahanadi Bhawan, Atalnagar Raipur, District Raipur, Chhattisgarh., District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh 2. 3. 4. The Collector Surajpur, District Surajpur, Chhattisagarh., District : Surajpur, Chhattisgarh The Chief Executive Officer Zila Panchayat Surajpur, District Surajpur, Chhattisgarh., District : Surajpur, Chhattisgarh The Chief Executive Officer Zila Panchayat Balrampur, District Balrampur-Ramanujganj, Chhattisgarh., District : Balrampur, Chhattisgarh 5. Chief Executive Officer Zila Panchayat (Surguja) Ambikapur, District Surguja, Chhattisgarh., District : Surguja (Ambikapur), Chhattisgarh 6. The Chief Executive Officer Janpad Panchayat Premnagar, District Surajpur, Chhattisgarh., District : Surajpur, Chhattisgarh 7. Pahluram Kushwaha S/o Dashram Aged About 24 Years R/o Village Sarna (Nauli), Post Raghunathnagar, District Surguja, Chhattisgarh., District : Surguja (Ambikapur), Chhattisgarh 8. Harishchand Prasad Gautam S/o Shri Ram Prasad Aged About 41 Years R/o Raghunathnagar, Police Station Raghunathnagar, Tahsil Wadrafnagar, District Balrampur-Ramanunjganj, Chhattisgarh., District : Balrampur, Chhattisgarh 9. Lal Bahadur S/o Late Munnalal Aged About 37 Years R/o Village Sarna, Police Station Raghunathnagar District Balrampur- Ramanujganj, District : Balrampur, Chhattisgarh 10. Tarkeshwar Yadav S/o Ram Vilas Aged About 43 Years R/o Village Rampur, Police Station Chalgali, District Balrampur-Ramanujganj, Chhattisgarh., District : Balrampur, Chhattisgarh 11. Baldeo Das S/o Shri Manglu Das Aged About 41 Years R/o Village Manpur Tahsil Wadrafnagar, Post Raghunathnagar, District Balrampur-Ramanujganj, District : Balrampur, Chhattisgarh 12. Ram Kumar Yadav S/o Laxmi Narayan Yadav Aged About 52 Years Tahsil Police Station Virendranagar, R/o Virendranagar, 7 Wadrafnagar, District Balrampur-Ramanujganj, District : Balrampur, Chhattisgarh 13. Mahendra Kumar Yadav S/o Jagdev Ram Aged About 41 Years R/o Village Vinayakpur, Post Manoharpur, District Balrampur- Ramanujganj, District : Balrampur, Chhattisgarh 14. Deepak Prasad S/o Krishna Prasad Aged About 44 Years R/o Village Kalikapur Janpad Panchayat Ramchandrapur, District Balrampur- Ramanujganj, District : Balrampur, Chhattisgarh 15. The Superintendent Of Police Anti Corruption Bureau Bilaspur, District Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh., District : Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh --- Respondent(s) For Petitioners For Respondent/State : : Mr.A.N. Pandey, Advocate. Mr. Ankur Kashyap, Dy. Govt. Advocate. For respondent No.3 & 6 : Mr. Jitendra Pali, Advocate. (Hon’ble Mr. Justice Narendra Kumar Vyas) Order on Board 20/01/2025 1. Since the common question of law and facts are involved in the bunch of these cases, they are heard analogously and are being
Decision
disposed of by this common order. 2. The petitioners have filed the bunch of these writ petitions under Article 226 of the Constitution of India assailing the impugned order dated 21-5-2019 (Annexure P/1) passed by respondent No. 3 - The Chief Executive Officer, Zila Panchayat, Surajpur, District Surajpur (CG) by which the representations filed by the petitioners have been rejected on the count that the petitioners were not having requisite qualification for appointment on the post of Siksha Karmi Grade III as per Right to Education Act, 2009, for appointment on the post of 8 Assistant Teacher. The impugned order further states that under the RTE Act, 2009, the candidates should have minimum qualification of 50% in higher secondary examination and must have two years Diploma in Education from the recognized institution and he should clear Teachers Eligibility Test. Since the petitioners were not having requisite qualification, their representations have been rejected by the respondent No. 3. 3. The brief facts as reflected from the record are that the petitioners were initially appointed on 30-6-1997 on temporary basis as Shiksha Karmi Grade II on the pay scale of Rs.1400/- and for the candidates who have B.Ed and B.T.I qualification, they should be given pay scale of Rs.1600/- and for Grade III, on the pay scale of Rs.1200/- as per the proposal made by the Education Committee, Janpad Panchayat, Premnagar for the period from 1sst July 1997 to 15-5- 1998. Accordingly, the appointment order was issued on 30-6-1997 and in pursuance thereof the petitioners have joined their services but all of a sudden, services of the petitioners have been discontinued. The petitioners have filed the Writ Petitions before this Court which were registered as WP No. 3386 of 2000, WPS No. 2660 of 2008, 7021/2009, 5469/2014, 7021/2o009, 2851/2016, 7332/2017 and 1366 of 2009 and this Court vide order dated 12-2- 2019 had directed the Chief Executive Officer to decide the representations of the petitioners within a stipulated period of four months from the date of receipt of such representation after considering all the points raised by the petitioners in accordance with law. The record of the case would demonstrate that some of the 9 petitioners have filed WPS No. 2660 of 2008 and WPS No. 7021 of 2009 wherein also the same order was passed by this Court. 4. Learned counsel for the petitioners would submit that the other petitioners whose representations were directed to be decided by this Court in the year 2005-2009 they have been appointed by the respondent No. 3 subjected to condition that within two years they should clear B.Ed course. He would further submit that the petitioners have filed the Writ Petition (s) No. 912 of 2019 in the year 2019 and this Court has also granted liberty to the petitioners to file fresh representations before respondent No. 3 and directed the respondent No. 3 to consider and decide the said representations and shall pass an appropriate order, in accordance with law keeping in view of the order passed on 20-9-2013, 8-10-2015, 13-7-2017 and 21-2-20218 (Annexure P./4) by this Court as expeditiously as possible, preferably within a period of four months from the date of receipt of such representations. In pursuance of the direction given by this Court, the representations filed by the petitioners have been examined by the respondent No. 3/Chief Executive Officer who vide order dated 21-5-2019 (Annexure P/1) has rejected the same. 5. Being aggrieved by the order passed by respondent No.3, the petitioners have filed the bunch of these writ petitions mainly contended that the petitioners have been subjected to discrimination as similarly situated petitioners have been granted benefit of employment whereas the petitioners have been denied which is nothing but arbitrary action on the part of the respondents. Thus, he would pray for allowing the writ petitions. 10 6. Per contra, learned counsel for the respondents would submit that the petitioners are not similarly situated persons as they have not approached this Court in the year 2005- 2009 and at that time Right to Education Act was not in force, therefore, they have been granted benefit of employment subject to condition of completion of B.Ed and T.E.T. whereas after implementation of Right to Education Act 2009, it is necessary that the candidate should have not only diploma or Decree in Education and he should clear Teachers Eligibility Test conducted by the appropriate Government. He would further submit that none of the petitioners has passed diploma or TET nor any documents have been annexed to show that they passed the diploma or decree in education or they have cleared the TET, as such they cannot be treated similarly, at par with other persons, therefore, they cannot be considered for grant of appointment, as such the respondent would pray for dismissal of the writ petitions 7. Mr. Jitendra Pali, learned counsel for Zila Panchayat would submit that after implementation of new Shiksha Karmi Rules, 1997, the petitioners have participated in the selection process but they were unable to clear the selection process, therefore, this is also the reason that the case of the petitioners has not been considered by the respondents. 8. 9. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record. The first submission by learned counsel for the petitioners that they are similarly situated persons to those persons who have been granted benefit of employment is being considered by this Court. 11 10. From bare perusal of the record, it is quite vivid that the petitioners were initially appointed in the year 1997-98 and they have filed the writ petitions in the year 2019 whereas other petitioners have filed the writ petitions in the year 2005-2009 and 2014-2016 wherein this Court has granted liberty to the petitioners to make representation before the Chief Executive Officer and that was considered by the Chief Executive Officer whereas the petitioners have approached this Court after 19 years, but the petitioners are unable to plead and prove that they are similar to the persons who have been granted appointment. The petitioners are unable to place on record that any person who is not having the requisite qualification for appointment has been appointed by the respondents. Even otherwise, in the impugned order the respondents have taken note of fact that even after enforcement of RTE Act apart from B.Ed degree the candidates should have clear the T.E.T. examination. Which admittedly the petitioners are not having the said qualifications. The grounds of rejected of the representations are in accordance with the RTE Act, 2009, as such there is no perversity or illegality in the impugned order passed by the respondent No. 3 warrants interference by this Court. 11. Accordingly, the bunch of writ petitions being devoid of merit are liable to be and are hereby dismissed. RAVVA SATYANARAYANA RAJU Digitally signed by RAVVA SATYANARAYANA RAJU Date: 2025.02.05 11:05:38 +0530 Raju Sd/- (Narendra Kumar Vyas) JUDGE