..^T^ //s3^. '^ i\ -i- ^ 'S'^'^lFn^PT, '^fte^, '[®i<ni^l|.< NWW WW^ ••^200 ^!^?^W (^i^«N^T) ^l'^'^T^fe' WT^l^l^^N' ^roe^^w^? [5inQle Bench;! W.P. (s) Nd.70 of 2009 (Petition U/A 226 of| PETITIONER Yat d Agedl baghj Vs RESPQNOENTS 1.5taJ Scho^ Raipu! Z.The Raipu] 3. (C.G.) Present: Mr. b.R. Patel, Advocate for the petitio Mr. PankGJShrivastava, Panel Lawyer f^r respondents to consider case of t provided under the rules, and also 1 ^Fifepfr? ^ITR^f ^ fe%t T^^R ^ ^RfRr^ii^T T1onr5I?TOff~7us1iceTRTren^^ IConstitution of India) ^am Patel, S/o late Sri Jagat Ram Patel, |about 66 years, R/o Kotara road, near Ram |Raigarh (C.G.) |'e of Chhattisgarh, Through: Secretary, ^l Education bepartment, DKS Bhawan, + (C.G.) Oirector, School Education Department, + (C.6.) Di^trict Education Officer Education, Raigarh ^ier. the State. 09.01.2009 By this petition the petition^r has prayed for a direction to the ^e petitioner and provide benefit of Section 22 (D) of the C.6. FundameJital Rules for grant of increments, as o pay arrears from the date when it became due. Learned counsel for the petitjioner submits that the petitioner was appointed to the post of Assistant t^istrict School Inspector, however, he was posted as Lecturer thereafjter. As per Rule 22 (b) of the ^n^n <NN H5.^n<^u^?t^t^—FS/95—1 1 /2Q08—1,00,000. + "^ '^, i^ ^^^^^ i if ^Bjigi, | ^..// '%^^'^l': 755| ^|A||<nq, s$xi1-y<)^, 1^TR?y ^iw^ir *NW :-^ 200 ^n^i TWF ('^t^l^) ^ST^?'^Tl^JW 'wi^n^TW^^ ^i^n^ ^ft^ ^i^^i f-undamenTal Rules The peTiTioner \s of next above the pay notionally arri' of the lower post by one incremen-J ^RfePiN ^?^f ^ fsll<l Tf^^R ^3?R|H^T^[ ^nTiTled tor pay tixaTion aT The STage |/ed at by increasing his pay in respect at that stage. He further submits that this matter has been finally d^cided by this Court vide order dated 27.3.2008 passed in W.P.(s) No.499jl/06 and the case of the petitioner is squarely covered by the aforesaid ori Mr. Shrivastava, learned Pane| not dispute that the case of the (J aforesaid order of Annexure P-S petitioner files fresh representatioj the reliefs which he has claimed by | !der. Lawyer appearing for the State does |etitioner is squarely covered by the . He further submits that if the \\ before the concerned authority for ^vay of this petition, the same shall be decided in accordance with law subj^ct to verification of the facts stated in the petition. In view of the above submissi|)ns, the instant petition is disposed of with liberty to the petitioner toj make fresh representation before respondent No.2 raising all his gri^vances raised in this petition and on such representation being made, re^pondent No.2 shall decide the same in accordance with law on its own merilj within a period of three months from the date of receipt of the represen-fation. Certified copy as per rules. »^____i Sd/- Dhirendra Mishra Judge 5fRT^V3T <§^N^^f^°r^^Rt^H^—FS/95—i 1 /2908—1,00,000.