Ap-i HiOH COURT W CHHATTiSGARH AT BILASPUR D8: Hon'ble Shri Dhirendra Mishra & Hon'ble Shri R.N. Chandrakar. JJ. Writ Petition (St No.6822 /2008 Petitioners 1 5. 6. Vs. Shiv Kumar Patel S/o LUhoram Patel, aged about 36 years, Occupatfon : Shiksha Karmi Grade-11, At Govt. Hgher Secondary School, Semariya, Btock Bamhnktih, Distrkst Janjgir Champa (C.G.) Laxman Prasad Yadav S/o Shri Tutei ram Yadav, aged about 35 years, Occupation : Shiksha Karmi Grade-11, At Govt- Higher Secondary School, Choriya, Btock Bamhnidih, Distfict Janjgir Champa (C.G.) Varun Kumar Shukla S/o Shri Ganesh Prasad Shukla, aged about 35 years, Occupatron : Shiksha Karmi Grade-11, At Govt. HgherSecondary School, Shlud, Btock Navagarh, District Jangir Champa (C,G.) Vimal Kumar Shrivas S/o. Shri Shiv Charan lal Shrivas, aged about 42 years, Occupatfon: Shiksha Karmi Grade-11, At Govt. Htgher Secondary School, Afrid, Btock Bamhnklih, District Jannir Champa (C.G.) Smt. Nilu Sharma W/o. Shri Satish Kumar Sharma, aged about 39 yeare, Occupatfon : Shiksha Karmi Grade-11, At Govt. Girte Higher Secondary School, Seoni (Naita), Btock Navagarh, Distrtet Janjgir Champa (C.G.) Shiv Kumar Singh Kanwar S/o. Bhagwat Prasad Kanwar, aged about 45 years, Occupatfon : Shiksha Karmi Grade-tt, At Govt. Higher Secondary School, Pahari)®, Btock Baloda, District Janjgir Champa (C.G.) -A- ':?^^ Respondents 3. 4. State of Chhattisgarh Throuah Its Secretary Panchayat and Rural Devetopment Department D.K.S. Bhawan, Raipur (C.G.) The Addittona! Secretary State of Chhattisgarh School Education Department, D.K.S. Bhawan, Raipur (C.G.) The Director Panchayat and Social Servfces. C.G. State Raipur The Chief Executive OTfcer, OfFtee of Jila Panchayat, Jangir District Janjgir-Champa (C.G.) Writ Petition (Sl N0.440(2009 Petitioners 1. 2. Respondents Vs. 1. 2. 3. 4. Smt. Renuka Patle W/o D.P. Patte Aged about 40 years, Occupatfon : Shiksha Karmi Grade-11, Presently posted at Govt. Higher Secondary Schoo!, Seoni, Tahsil & District Janjgir- Champa (C.G.) Smt. Aruna Vyas Miri W/o Laxman Prasad Miri.Agedabout 38 years, Occupatun : Shiksha Karmi Grade-lt, Presently posted at Govt. Higher Secondary School, Hardi(Jarve) Tahsil & District Janjgir-Chamapa (C.G.) Tlie State of Chhattisgarh "nirough The Secretary Panchayat and Rural Devetopment Department D.K.S. Bhawan, Raipur (C.G.) TheAdditunal Secretary State of Chhattisgarh School Education Department, D.K.S. Bhawain, Raipur (C.G.) The Dlrector Panchayat and Social Services, C.G. State Raipur (C.G.) The Chief Executive Officer, OfRce of Jite Pancha^it, Jangir Distrfct Janjgir-Champa (C.G-) AND Wnt Petltion (Si No-1128/2008 Petltioners 1. Baburam Durve S/o Laie Ram Durve aged about 38 years Shiksha Karmi Grade-tl Govt. Higher Secondaiy School Saonsari District Janjgir-Champa 2. Smt. Sunjta Sihani W/o Jagdish Prasad Sihani aged about 36 yaars Shiksha Karmi Grade II Govt. Higher Secondary School Sonsari District Janjgir-Champa Vs. Kespondente 1. State of Chhattisgarh Through Secretary Panchayat and Rural Deveiopment Depaitrnent D.K.S. Bhawan, Raipur (C.G.) 2. The Addmonal Secretary State of Chhattisgarh School Education Department, D.K.3. Bhawan, Raipur (C.G.) 3. The Director Panchayat and Social Services, C.G. State Raipur 4. The Chief Executive Officer, Office of Jila Panchayat, Jangir Disirict Janjgir-Champa (C-G.) (Writ Petition under Article 226 of the Constltunon of India) Present: Shri Rajesh Kr.Sharma and Shri Ashwini Shukla, counsel for the petitioners. Shri Sumesh Bajaj, Govt. Advoeate for ttie State. Shri Alok Bakshi, counsel for respondent No.4. ORAL ORDER (06.09.20-10) l. The above wnt petitions are being disposed of by this common order as in all these petltions, petitloners have challenged the notitication dated 30"' November, 20071ssued by respondent No.1 in exercise of power under Section 70 sub-Section ('l), Section 53 suo-yection (1) Part-B read witn Section 95 sub-Section (1) of the Ghhamsgarh Panchayat Raj ^^. Adhlniyam 1993, whereby Chhattisgarh Panchayat Shiksha Karmi Recruitment and Service Conditions Rules, 2007 have been framed and in Schedule 4 framed under Rule 8, tor the purpose of promotion from Shiksha Karmi Grade II to Shiltsha Karmi Grade I, eligibility criteria of post graduation in related subject, B.Ed^D.Ed. and seven years teaching experience has been prescribed. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioners submit that the petitioners were appointed as Shiksha Karmi Grade-11 when Chhattisgarh Panchayat Shiksha Karmi Recruitment and ConditionSemce Rules, 1997 was in force. Eligibility criteria for promotion from Shiksha Karmi Grade-tl to Grade-1 under Schedule 4 framed under Rule 5 (1)(b) and Rule 8 ofRule 1997 was oniy post graduate degree in related subject and 7 years experience. 1-ie further argued that the petitioners should be permitted to undertaKe B.Edj'D.Ed. course as departmental candidates in view of the eligibility criteria for promotion to the post of Shiksha Karmi Grade 1 under the rule 2CX)7, so that they may also get an opportunlty to improva their qualification to be eligible for promotion tothe post of Shiksha Karmi Grade I. 3. Shri Sumesh Bajaj, learned Govt. Advocate argued that the petitionsrs have no right to claim that rules governing conditions of their service should be foreverthe same as the one when they entered service. Additional quaiification for promotion to the post of Shiksha Karmi Grade 1 under the rules 2007 cannot be deciared as ultra-virus on this ground. 4. We have heard learned counsel for the parties. 5. It is settled law that there is no rignt of any employee of the State to ctaim that rules aoverning conditjons of his sen/ice sh.ouid be torevsr the t.u -f- 8. same as the one when he entered service for ait the purposes and except for ensuring or safeguaraing rights and beneflts atready earned, acquired or accrued at a particular point <rf time, government servant has no right to challenge the authority of the State to amend, atter and bring Into force new ruies retating to even an existing service. Therefore, in our considered opinion, the impugned ruie cannot be saidto be uitra-virus to tne Constitution. Piease refer to the judgments of Supreme Court in P.U. Joshi v. Accountant General reported in 1 (2003) 2 SCC 632 and T.N. Electricitv Board V. T.N. Electricitv Board Thozhilar Avkkiva Sanaam reported in (2008) 3 SCC 359. We deem it proper that the petit|Qne^,,?hould,be permitted to file appllcation for permission to appear in B.Ed./D.Ed. course as departmentat candidates to the respondents. If such applications are fiied, the concerned authorHy shall allow them to pursue B.Ed./D.Ed. course asdepartmental candidates, provided they futfillthe necessary conditions for the above course as per the prescribed rules and regulations. With the aforesaid observation, the petitions are disposed of. Dh"-end^M,shra Judge Sdf- R.N.C^dl:akar """judge SlMI