«1.; F ' 2x EN. THE HQN’BLE EEGEE CGUR’E" 0:? CEiEiATTISGARE—I JUEHCATEJRE AT BILASPUR WRIT APPEAL NO Q»?€3 ‘ mos Chhattisgarh £5 Ors‘) has bagn dismissaé.) 12s OF Erma CQURT §3§$ asiiHATrTrSGARri RULES 20135. 1APPEAL WM? , APPEAL TQwQmégQNvBENCNRLAmqgwms . -. ymEg: m sECIEQN m . 2 gyW egggwrSGARH READ WITH RULE ‘ u. v / PETTEONER APPELLANT Smt. Pagpg Chgtri, W/o— Shri Pravin Kumar Cham; Assistant Teacher, Forest Primary ’ Q} School—Dugh‘, Teiisil-Nagri, Distt. Dhamtari (C,G.) VERSUS RESFQNEEN'E‘S : 1. Statg 0f Chhattisgarh, Through-Chief Secretary, Department ofFarest, DAKS. Bhawam Raipur. 2. Divisional Foregt Ofiicer, Territorial/Genera a Forest Division, Dhamtari, Chhattisgarh. ‘ f ‘V *' 3. Forest Rangc Officer, Dugli Range, Distt. Dhamtari (CG) HIGH gggRT OF cnug‘mggAgg A: giggsPuR DB: Hag’ge @mg Shri sn‘ri Justice Jugice Prgshant §unil Kumg; K Sinha and umar Mishra ‘ Writ Aggea: Ng.2g_s' or gm Smt. Puspa Chatri versus State of Chhattisgarh and others R FOR CONsl E TION I i < “, 1 Sd/— ‘ Prashant Kumar M‘shra _. Judg§ //, v . r ‘ ‘ ‘ S““\\ 8“age ,/‘/ 7////. «"// j ‘f on’ble hr‘Suni ‘rsnh J.: , WP0§t for mugoog ( v“ J V, ”N“ \ } j ; Sci/- (e-1’2~2"oo9 HIGH COURT OF CHHA'ITISGARH AT §ILASEUR @: n’b ri u ‘ Su ilK rSin and Hon’ble §hri Justice Eragant Kama; Migga W;it Aw! Naggq of 2008 Shri Alok Shri Bakshi, Pankaj Govemment Shrivastava, Advocate counselfgr for‘the thgappetlant, State/respondents. 7 . WrE AQ§al gaggr §g_c_tg' g 2 of the Chhmg' a!!! $gh Cggrt magl’to Qivision BenchlrActr u I O E Q E B ( 1h12-g009} Per Prashant Kmr Misha, y In this writgppeai lthegappeiiaijt, has prayedifgr settiggggside the order dated 21-7-2008 (Annexure A-1) passed by the learned Single Judge in Writ Petition No.134/2003. The prayer before the teamed Single Judge made by the appellant/petitioner was to seek a direction to the respondents to grant regular pay scale of Rs.545—:925 per month with effect from 1-4-1986 with arrears of pay ano consequential benefits. 2. Facts of the case, briefly stated, areethat megappellantzpetitioner was engaged on daily wages from 10~9—1_983 toperform the duties of a A»? teacher in the forest vitlage school at therate of Rs.3.80 Raise per day. 1 The said order, engaging the appellant/petitioner, was issued by the Forest Range Officer, Nagri. By a communication dated 23-10-1984 (Annexure P-2 with'the writ petition) the Divisional Forest Qffloer. South i ti ‘i C1 33> AQ£Hant Petitioner Smt. Puspa Chatri ¥§JI§J§ Resmde$ State of Chhattisgarh KW? Raipur Forest Division, Raipur directed that alisuch Deputy Teachers, who are engaged in the primary schoois situated at forest villages, shall be paid a fixed wages_qf_Rs.300/- per month. Resting her case on the instructiOns issued by the School Education Department of Government of Madhya Pradesh on 17-3-1986123:4,:1986l (Annexure P-4 with the writ petition), the appellant/petitioner claimed that she is entitled for the similar benefit of grant of regular pay-scale of RS545— 925 on the reasoning that she'has also completed one year service on or before 1-4-1986. The appellant/petitioner appears to a have submitted a representation to the Joint Director, Publiclnstructions, Raipur on 20-4-1989 for grant of regular pay scale with effect from 1- 1 1-1984. By order dated 5-84999 (Annexure P-7 with the writ petition) her representation was rejected by the Divisional Forest Officer, Dhamtari ForestDivision (General), Dhamtari. ln thesaid order, the Divisional Forest Officer has clearly stated that post of DeputyTeacher in the Forest Department is not sanctioned and she has never been appointed as Deputy Teacher. Instead, she wasfappointed on daily wages to perform the duties of a teacher. The order also states that her services were also regularized iikeany other daily wage labourer, however, since post of Deputy Teacher is not available in the Forest Department, the question of grant of regular pay scale with effect from 1-11-1984 does not arise. By communication dated 8-7-2002 (Annexure P-8 with the writ petition) the Divisional Forest {Officer ‘ directed the appellant/petitioner to produce the order of appointment, if any, by which she was appointed as Deputy Teacher. _ w \ av- l 3. The writ petition was submitted on 27-12-2002 claiming regular pay scale of Rs.545—925 per month with effect from 1-4-1986. 4. The Ieamed Single Judge dismissed 'thekwrit petition after holding that it is an admitted position that the petitioner was initially appointed as daily wager dehors the constitutional scheme of public employment and as such she cannot claim regular paymscale with effect from 1-4—1986. lt has also been held that the, petition suffers from delay and laches inasmuch as the writ petition has been submitted after a period of 16 years, from the date of accrual of the cause of action without offering any explanation or justification for such inordinate delay. 5. Shri Pankaj Shrivastavar Ieamed counsel for the appellant/petitioner hasurgedthat the appellant/petitioner is entitled for benetit of regular pay scale with effect from 141986 on the strength of Annexure P—4 (with the writ petition), which is a circular issued by the School Education Department of the Government ofMadhya Pradesh on 1 7-3-1 986/23-4—1 986. 6. On the other hand, Shri Alok Bakshi, learned Govemment Advocate appearing for the State/respondents has submittedthat the services of the appellant/petitionerzhave been regularized with effect from 2-1-1992 (Annexure R-1 with the writ petition) in the Forest 1 Department like any other labourer working in the Forest Department and that she was never appointed as Deputy Teacherby the Forest Department and also that from the letters issued bygthe Divisional Forest Officer, Dhamtari vide Annexures P-7 andP—8 (with the writ @(i .4? petition) it is apparent that post of Deputy Teacher is not avaiiabie in the Forest Department. He has also submitted that the circular issued by the School‘Education Department of (Government of Madhya Pradesh is appiicable to such Deputy Teachers who, were regularly recruited and granted fixed pay for the first two years of their appointment. According to him, the circular is of no help to the appellant/petitioner. 7. From the record it does not appear that the appellant/petitioner was at any point of time appointed as Deputy’Teacher ins pursuance to any process of recruitment. she was only appointed on daily wages to perform the duties of a teacher in the forest villageyschool under the Forest Department. Her services were later on regularized with effect from 2-1~1992 like any other labourer working in, the Forest Department. The circular dated 17-3-1986/23—4-14986 (Annexure P-4 with the writ petition) appears to be applicable to such Deputy Teachers who were regularly recruited in the School Education Department and is not applicable to the appellant/petitioner who was a daiéy wage teacher drawing daily wages as a labourer in the Forest Department. 8. The impugned order dismissing the writ petition passed by the learned Single Judge does not suffer from any error of law or fact or jurisdiction. The writ appeal deserves to be,and is, accordingly i l .g w i dismissed./ ,V,“ /*// Sdl— i‘. ’ Sd/- , : 1v Sun“ Kuma" 5mm Prashant Kumar Mishra ‘. i‘ i l , Jud‘:’,:_;/-: 7. - :Iudge l I