Disputed Pay Scale Revision Claims Must Be Addressed via Competent Authority Representations Under 1982 Gazette Notification.

The petitioner, working as a Time Keeper under the Public Works Department (PWD) in Raipur, filed a writ petition seeking a revision of his pay scale and the grant of higher pay benefits

He contended that he is entitled to these benefits as per the Gazette Notification dated 14.10.1982

The petitioner sought relief similar to that granted in WPS No. 1267/2026 and other batch petitions, such as Dwarikadas Vaishnav & another v. State of Madhya Pradesh (now CG) and others (WPS No. 2904 of 2005), which dealt with identical questions of law

1. Whether the petitioner is entitled to a revision of his pay scale and higher pay benefits in accordance with the Gazette Notification dated 14.10.1982

2. Whether the Court should direct the respondent authorities to consider and decide upon a fresh representation filed by the petitioner in light of existing judicial precedents

Gazette Notification dated 14.10.1982 issued by the State of Madhya Pradesh (applicable to Chhattisgarh), which governs pay scale revisions for specific cadres

The principle of parity and judicial consistency, referencing the Coordinate Bench decision in Dwarikadas Vaishnav & another v. State of Madhya Pradesh (now CG) and others (WPS No. 2904/2005), which established the practice of allowing similarly situated employees to submit representations for pay revision to the competent authority

The Court noted that the petitioner did not press the writ petition on its merits but limited his plea to seeking a direction for the administrative consideration of his claims

The petitioner argued that because his circumstances were identical to those in the Dwarikadas Vaishnav case, he should be afforded the same procedural remedy

The State/respondents raised no objection to this approach, provided the petitioner submits a fresh representation for evaluation

Consequently, the Court found it appropriate to delegate the factual determination of eligibility to the competent authority, ensuring that the Petitioner’s case is evaluated specifically against the criteria set out in the 1982 Notification

It granted the petitioner liberty to submit a fresh representation to the competent authority. The Court ordered the competent authority to consider and decide the representation in light of the Gazette Notification dated 14.10.1982 within a period of six months from the date of receipt of the representation