Absorbed Panchayat teachers are ineligible for Kramonnati benefits applicable to regular School Education Department employees.

The thirty petitioners, serving as Head Masters and Assistant Teachers in various government primary schools in District Mahasamund, filed a writ petition seeking a mandamus to implement the 2017 Kramonnati (Time-bound Promotion) Order

They sought an upgraded pay scale and arrears effective from the completion of 10 or 20 years of service, relying on the precedent in Sona Sahu v. State of Chhattisgarh (W.A. No. 261/2023)

The State resisted the claim, arguing that the petitioners were originally appointed as Shikshakarmis by the Janpad Panchayat (Panchayat Department) and were only absorbed into the School Education Department following a policy decision dated 30.06.2018

Consequently, the State maintained that they were not regular employees of the School Education Department during the period for which the benefit was claimed

1. Whether employees originally appointed under the Panchayat Department and subsequently absorbed into the School Education Department are entitled to Kramonnati Vetanman (upgraded pay scale) under the State circular dated 10.03.2017

State Government Circular dated 10.03.2017, which governs the grant of Kramonnati benefits

judicial precedent established by a Coordinate Bench of the Chhattisgarh High Court in WPS No. 11009 of 2025 (decided on 24.11.2025), which held that Shikshakarmis governed by rules framed under the Panchayat Raj Adhiniyam, 1993, do not qualify as teachers of the School Education Department for the purpose of the 2017 circular until their formal absorption

The Court noted that the petitioners did not dispute their status as erstwhile employees of the Panchayat Department or their initial appointment by the Janpad Panchayat

The Court observed that for the period prior to their absorption in 2018, the petitioners were governed by separate service rules under the Panchayat Raj Adhiniyam, 1993, rather than the School Education Department's regulations

By applying the reasoning from the lead case WPS No. 11009 of 2025, the Court determined that the petitioners failed to fulfill the specific criteria laid down in the 10.03.2017 circular, as they were not "teachers of the School Education Department" during the years of service in question

The Court concluded that since the facts were identical to the previously dismissed batch of petitions, the petitioners were not entitled to the benefit of the Sona Sahu judgment

The writ petition was dismissed in accordance with the findings in WPS No. 11009 of 2025

No relief regarding pay scale upgradation or disbursement of arrears was granted.