>.ft-^^® ^e^at"^.S-/-" L<** iei»«^^8 & iTar'^§^3§/^CIii SliLt |sfc:Nl>t1'/'/ IN THE HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH. AT - BILASPUR WRIT PETITION N0. <> 2"^ ^ / 2006 PETITIONER / ...•-"yy ^O-''A'^" y ^^i!>^...'-" VERSUS v$/. RESPONDENTS /:1. RAMDHANI RAM VISHWAKARMA AGED-65 YEARS, SON OF BHAROSAVISHWAKARMA, RETIRED ACCOUNTANT, FROM 0/0 CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER, AT - DANTEWADA, DISTRCT - DANTEWADA (C. G.) R/0 KAILASH NAGAR, DANTEWADA (C. G.) ^OMM/^ ^ — "\ ^» 2. o^ /3- STATE OF CHHATTISGARH, THROUGH - THE SECRETARY, TRIBAL WELFARE DEPARTMENT, D. K. S. BHAWAN, RAIPUR THE COMMISSIONER, TRIBAL WELFARE DEPARTMENT, CHHATTISGARH, H. Q. - PT. R. S. U. CAMPUS, RAIPUR THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER, OFFICE OF THE COLLECTOR, (TRIBAL DEVELOPMENT BRANCH) DISTRICT - SOUTH BASTER DANTEWADA (C. G.) WRIT PETITION U/A - 226 & 227 OF CONSTITUTION OF INDIA XI-HC-22 3TI^T?ir f^wsn^r i»i*<rofl)^(T Bawe ^ /-^ 3^ •<<I<IIM<I, siTflwis, fsfdiyy 3ii^i <<a<h ^.^.^^.'^.^K «4i»fdia>w»> WI.^ 200 sfi^i g'wiwflfer -10-7-2006:- Shri R.K. Kesharwani, couns Shri Ashutosh Kachhawai respondents, on advance copy. l-1eard both the counsel.. The main grievance raised even though the petitioner was gi on, on account of revisiQn of pay Punarikshan Niyam, 1990, two pa^ of which the petitioner was gett| similarly situated persons. [ei for the petitioner. ha, Govt. Advocate for the State/ |by the petitioner in this petition is that r^nted two higher pay scales, but, iater ^cale under the Madhya Pradesh Vetan scales have been merged, as a resu!t |ng less salary in comparison to the March 1999/19th Apri! 1999 the pe| scales after completion of 24 yea| totally misconceived because the benefit of two higher pay scale, as| pay scale. If the petitioner has and merger of pay scales the petit| to the similarty situated persons, for removal of anomaly which has| pay/scales. The petition is disposed of ^ Parties are entitied for certifl «ni<<f<'i<fl-iKiidT^'fe'^iRl+iK ^SI^TSfT^T his is not a case where uhder the Government order dated 17 ptioner v/as not grantsd favo higher pay |-s of service, fterefore, this petition is l^etitioner ha4a!ready been granted the jsuch, again he cannot c!aim the higher an^ grievance that on account of revision |oner is getting tess pay in comparison tlten he has to represent to the authority Ibeen created on account of revision of cordingly. id copy of this order. Sd/- L.C. Bhadoo Judge (<ft^^ir)