'^ IN THE HIGH COURT OF CHHACTISGARH AT BII.ASPUR, PETITIONER .-.••• ..^^•^ ;^s^-" ^vr .. t.^*'" RESPONDENTS ^ r. .'' WRIT PETITION N0 y^cs,'OF 2002. R.S. Venna, S/o, shri Ayodhya Prasad Verma> Aged about ^''^years, progress Assistant ( Retd.) R/o» Harra Padav, Near Vetenary Hospital, Kea al, "Distt. Bastar (C.G,) . VE RS U S ^/l. State of'Chhattisgarh, through s The Secretary» Fj-aance Department Mantralaya» "s: ; D.K.S, Building RAIPUR, (CHH/aTISGAEH) . 2. The Director, Economicsand Statistical Directarate, BHOPM» (M.P,). 3. The Dlrector> Economics and Statistieal Directarate, &AIPUR (c.G.). WRIT PETCTION UNDER IST1CIS 226 & 227 OF THE COKSTITUTION OP II-iDIA. F4!W^^Sa ^75. ^Ji.V S.B. : HON'BLE MR. SATISH K. AGNIHOTRI, J. WRIT PETITION N0.2805 OF 2< Petitioner R.S. Verma versus <esoonaenis State ofChhattisgarh and others Prssent : Mr. PraftiU Bharai counsel for the netitioae.r. Mrs. Anju Ahuja, Deputy Govemment Advocate for respondentsNo.l and 3. None appears for respondem No.2. ifli (Passed on 29"1 ofAugust, 2006) The petitioner was employed as Lower Division Clerk by order dated 7-5-1960 (Ajinexure P-1). Pursuant to advertisement fbr appointment on the post of Progress Assistant, the petitioner, a'ong with others- applied for and was selected by order dated 10- 12-1963 (Annexure P-3). He was relieved from the post ofLower Division Clerk to join his ne.w appointmeflt on the post of Progress Assistant by order dated 1-1-1964 (Annexure P-4), wherein it was clearly stated that the petitioaer was not entitled to L.P-C. as the appoi'ntment ofthe petitioner on the post ofProgress Assistant was a IBSSi llllNil aiiJ •e- fi-esh appomtment. The petitioner was appointed on the post of Progress Assistant on a pay-scale ofRs.l 15-220. Thereafter, on absorption of his services in the Directorate of Economics and Statistics, higher pay-scale of Rs.220-375 was granted to the petitioner oa 30-4-1981'(Annexiire R-2). The petitioner continued on the same ipay-scale of Rs.220-375- The petitk)ner thereafter continued on the same post without having any opportimity of promotion- The petitioner was granted first Kramonnati on 7-3- 1987 (Annexure P-7) with effectfrom 5-4-1983 on the scale of Rs.680-1120 after completion of 12 years 6f service. The State Govemmenf, keeping in view stagnation in the pay-scale, floated a scheme for gra&t of Kramounati by Circular dated 17-3-1999/19-4- 1999 (AnnexHre R-l), wherein it was cleariy provided that ifi.dn employee has|not received two higher pay-scales during his servifce- time, he would be entitled fo second Kramonnati aflter a period of24 years Admittedly, the petitiQner has worked for more than 36 years with one higher pay-scate (Kramormati). The petitioner was ^iot grauted second higher pay-seale (Kramonnati). AGCQrdingly, he was entitled to two Kramonnatis under the provisions of Circular dated 17-3-1999/19-4-1999 (AiinexufeR-1). 2. Caseofresponder(tsNc>.land3jisthatfirstpa^E i.e., Rs. 115-22Q grarited t0i tba petitioner on his apR6Bitmeffit|jas Progress Assi^trt, which was a new appomtment, iyeitree^(|jas K-t" '>;-! ;1^)"-^- -s- ,ifc.J grant offirst higher pay-scale and thereafter grant of second pay- scale on absorption, i.e-, Rs.220-375 be treated as second higher pay-scale. Conterition of respondents No.l and 3 deserves to be rejected on the &ce of it, as the relieving order dated 1-1-1964 (Aunexure P-4) clearly prbvides that the appointment of the petitioner on the post of Progress Assistantwas a new appoinlment. Thus, the pay-scale granted earlier has nothing to do with the appoiatmeat ofthe petitioner on the post ofProgress Assisfant. llll:i41! 3. Ttiie petitioner was grarited pnly one higher pay-seale (KrafflQnnati),ie.,E.s.680-I120on 7-3-1987 (Annexure P-7). Bare reading of Circular dated 17-3-1999./19-4-1999 (Annexure R-l) makes it clear that if an employee stagnates on one pay-scale fCir s 12/24 years and is not granted two higher pay-scales, tfae employee will be entitled to two Kramonnatis. The petitioner has been granted one higher pay-scale (Kramonnati). llll:iil }: •? '.I 4. The respondents are directed to grairt pne more Kramonnati to fthe petitioner in accondance with Circulardated 3-1999/19-4-1999 (Annexure R-I). 5. Accordmgly. the petition is allowed witli CQs|& quantified to be Rs.5,000/- (Rypees Five Thousand). GertifieB copy asppr ryles. ..-;..!S::'^^: I'fil J^l