(^ --» [t ^ IN THE HON'BLE HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISHGARH AT BILASPUR C.G. PETITIONERS .-...a's ^'^f';.^ &^:<^^ ^^'A" ....-•<' y**'?"...--"\h' W.P. (S) No. ^jz-^ (1) (2) (3) (^ ^ Sharab kuinar Nand S/o Late Shri Sobharainnand, Aged 25 Years, Village Gidhapali post Bhukel Thana Tahsil Basna Distric Mahasamund C.G. VERSUS The State Govt. of Chhattishgarh, Through - The Secretary, Education Department D.K.S. Bhavan, Raipur (C.G.) District Education ofGcer, Mahasamund (C.G) Joint Director Treasury and pension Raipur(C.G) WRIT PETITION UNDER ARTICLE 226 CONSTITUTION OF INDIA FOR ISSUANCE OF WRIT OR ^ ^ HIGH CQURT QF CHHAmSCTARH AT_BILA8PUR PETmONER WRTJ PETITION fS) No. 922 of2011 Shamb Kumar Nand. RESPONDENTS VERSU8 The State Govt. of Cfahattisgarh & Others. WRIT PETmON UNDER ARTICLE 226 OP THE CONSTnTrTION OF WDIA 8B: Hon'ble Shri Prashant Kumar Mishra, J. Present: Shri SomkantVemia.Advoeatefbrthepetitioner. Shri Ajit Sin^i, Panel lavvyer for the State/respondents. ORDERfORALV (Passed on 14tB day of Febroaty, 2011) 1. Leamed counsel appearing for fhe petitioner would submit tfaat the father ofthe petitioner namely Shobharam Nand, who was appoiated as Assistairt Teacher in the year 1974 on a fixed pay ofRs. 100/- died in the year 2001. The mother ofthe petitioner also died in 1he year 2010. The instant petition has been subnritted to claun regular pay scale from the initial date of appointment ofhis fafher, wtuch might have been granted to the father ofthe petitioner had he remamed aliye, as the inatter is covered by the decision of this Court iu JagannafA Ram v. State ofChhattisgarh & Others^ and other comiectsd matters. Therefore, the petitioner may be pennitted to make a refM-esentation before the respondent autfaorities. 2. Leamed counsel appearing far other side has no objeetion. 3. Accordingly, the petitioner is granted liberty to make a rg)resentation raising all his grievances and in tum, the concemed respondent is ' W.P.(S) No. 6128/20071, decided on 20.0i.2009 ^"^ ^ Gowri direeted to decide the representation, ifany, ia accordance with law, on its own merits, within a period of8 weeks from the date ofreceipt oflhe representation, subject to verification oftfie &cts. 4. However, it is made clear that this Court has not expressed any opinion about the petitioner's entitlement to receive the arreai^ rf regular pay scale on behalf of his father (deceased employee). The respondent authorities, while deciding the represeirtation of the petitioner shall consider this aspect also, -in aceordance with law. 5. In view of the foregoing, this petition is disposed of. Noorder asto costs. Sd//- Prashant Kumar Mishra Judge