^- IN THE HON'BLE HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WRIT PETITION (S) NQ. 2-6 36 OF 2011 PETiTlONER RESPONDENTS ^^ v^^ 5--:'W'^1" -*''*'h^>^<*'<? V^'" ^^^ y'^{^•" Vimal Kumar Singh Aged about 49 years, S/o Late Shri R.A.Singh, Occupation - Teacher, District Rehabilitation Centre, Bilaspur, R/o Bandhwapara Tehsil and District Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh VERSUS 1. State of Chhattisgarh, Through Secretary Panchayat and Social Welfare Department, DKS Bhawan, Raipur, Chhattisgarh 2. Director, Panchayat and Social Welfare Department, D.K.S. Bhawan, Raipur, C.G. 3. Collector, JagdalpUr District Bastar, Chhattisgarh 4. Joint Director, Treasury Accounts and Pensjon, Jagdalpur, District Bastar, Chhattisgarh 5. Shri A. P. Sharma, Superintendent Government School for Blind and Deaf, u'agda!pur, District Bastar, Chhattisgarh 6. Superintendent, District Rehabilitation Centre, Bilaspur Tehsil and District Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh. WRIT PET1T10N UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA FOR ISSUANCE OF A WRIT IN THE NATURE QF MANDAMUS, ORDER OR ORDERS, DIRECTION OR DIRECTIONS OR THE LIKE 1. PARTICULARS OF THE P£I 11 311^1 VI Itl'fi'h WT SH^fT 9bllt<*i 'S^S ^WW^, (Sfll^'Ko, fi|<11-9^< ^^.....M.{.1V...^11£./..LL WqWslTRra?""""""""'"""'""'"""";R?l. 3D^?T''PW (^f3aiyt) TOTOFCdfCT 3Tl4?I SB ; [Hon'ble Shri Manla^ra Mohan Shrivastava. J.] 13.5.2011 Shri Lokesh Singh, Shri Sushil Dubey, Qovt cjsunsel for the petitioner. Qovt. Advocate for fhe State, on advance copy. Heard on admission. The grievance of the dismissal from service in 'c No. 1033/03, the benefit ol the petitioner. Vide memo P-9), fhe Superintendent 4i|<lfrt'ft") tIPIcff ^f ft^t <ri]<<]< ^T sffiPT SIl^T petttioner is fhat even fhoiigh order of departmental eaquiry was quashed by this Coiut vide order dat^d 19ul Januaiy, 2007 passed in W.P. 6th Pay Scale is not being extended to dated 14ui Februaiy, 2011 (Annexure has informed fhat tfae case of fhe petitioner for grant of ben^fit of 6th Pay-Scale has been prepared and fonyarded to the Joirt Director vide memo dated 17.6.2009 and arrears cannot be gr^nted luiless the saine is available by the Jojnt Director. Leamed counsel for jflie petitioner submitted that ajfter the order was passed by the ^ourt on 19«h Janiiary, 2007, no fresh enquiry has been irutiated.] ^w If fhat be so, fhe cla^m of the petitioner for grant of 6a Pay Scale on (he strengtfa of Jris remstatement m service, does not ^. 'e». •S ^. .^^!?.^-. % S St ::&..'^fi6&Bia ? '%. %>., '^a<T*'"' ^ ^&l^ x;aSSKaSi8!?FiiXI-HC—7S an^ivi h-6'^ WTaii^rsRiw Prasreea '7=r "4i<ii<ri'4, (Sxily'ia, f°«?iiyy,< WNMI sb*ll<h "^200 3(I^T -qiISF (1pf3^i) TCnwafeisn^i 2-- appear to be flAvolous. shows (hat the case of th^ Joint Du'ector way back Q Director is therefore directe for grant of benefit of 6th F claim of (he petitioner s verification, expeditiously, With the aforesaid disposed of. +I^^^'1 ^rtct*! ^f f^^ •(.f^i'^.K, ^; aifin aiii?i L^tter dated 14.2.2011 (Annexure P-9) petitloner has been fonvarded to ffae ip. 17.6.2009. Respondent No.4/Joint |d to proceed the case of fhe petitioner ]ay Scale in accordance with law. The jhall be decided after makmg due lidthout undue delav. ^bservations, the petition is finally ManindraMohanShrivastava Judge