MIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR WRIT PETIT80N (Sj No.6863/2010 PETITIONER RgSPONDEMTS K.P. Chaturvedi S/o Late Shiv Prasad Chatun,'edl, aged about 61 years, r/o village Pendra District BiSaspur (C.G.) presentSy posted as Headmaster at Middie Schooi Sarkari para Pendra District Bllaspur (C.G.) Versys 1 State of Chhattjsgarh, Through the Secretary Department of Tribai Weifare D.K.S. Bhawan, Raipur Chhattisgarh 2 Assistant Commissioner, Tribal Weifars BISaspur Chhattisgarh 3 Biock Education Officer TribaS Biock Pendra District Bilaspur (C.G.) • WRSTfQmgXUXI^E.ARTJCLgl2t5£T|iE CO^ST!TUTSON OF SI^DSA ApDssrar.cs : ' -., ' IVSr. A.V. Shridhar, Counsel tor the petitioner. Mr. Valbhav Goverdhan, Pane! Lavvyer for the State/respondents. 0.8ALORDER (2S.11.2010) SUNIL KUNAJit^NHA, J. Heard. Petitioner'K.P. Chaturvedi is worKing on the post of Headmaster, Middle School Sarkaripara, Pendra Distnct Bilaspur (C.G.). He has fiied this writ petition for the foliowjng reliets: "1. Tnat this Hon'ble Court may kindiyjse pieased to Issue a appropriate writ/order/direcfion thereby directing the respondents to pass appropriate order tor grant of prevailing revised ffi'-f' 2 WRST PETIT10N (Sl No.6863/2010 2. upper grade pay scaie, correctlng the earlier order ciated 19/03/1998 Annexure P/3 for grant of upper grade pay scale of 2000-60-2300-75- 3200-75-3200-100-3500 per month from earlier pay scale of 1640-2900 given with ettect from 01.01.1998 instead of 01.04.1993 on his completing 12 years at the post of headmaster. Anv other relief which this Hon'bie Court deems fit and proper may be passed. Learned counsel tor the petitioner submits that the petitioner is aiready due for his second Kramonatl, but the same has not been given to him. He submits that even the first Kramonati was glven to the petitioner w.e.f. 01.01.1998, whereas, the petitioner was entitled for it w.e.f. 01.04.1993. For the present, he submits that thls petltion may be disposed of with a llberty to the petitioner to fite a fresh representation before the concerned authority and the concerned authority may be directed to dispose of the same at the earllest. Thls limited prayer made by learned counsel for the petitioner is not opposed by learned counsel for the State. Accorclingly, this writ petition is finaiJy disposed of with the direction that if so advised, the petitioner may fiie a fresh representation along with the copy of this writ petitlon and the copy of this order before the concerned authority wsthin a penod of 3 weeks from today and if such a representation is flied, the concerned authority shall ciispose of the same at the eariiest in accordance with iaw. VVith the above observations/directions, the writ petition stands finaliy disposed of. ! • Sd/- . 1 Sunil Kumar Sinha Judge