PANCHU RAM SAHU vs STATE OF CHHATTISGARH Advocate - A.G. — WA/307/2026

Disposed: Contested--DISMISSED on 16th April 2026.

Case disposed

CNR: CGHC010090212026

Filing Number

WA/5175/2026

Filing Date

28-Feb-2026

Registration No

WA/307/2026

Registration Date

30-Mar-2026

Judge

Hon'ble The Chief Justice , Hon'ble Shri Justice Ravindra Kumar Agrawal

Coram

Hon'ble The Chief Justice , Hon'ble Shri Justice Ravindra Kumar Agrawal

Bench Type

Division Bench

Category

SERVICE MATTERS ( 6 )

Sub-Category

PAY SCALES/ INCREMENTS / ALLOWANCES. ( 610 )

Judicial Branch

Writ Section

Decision Date

16-Apr-2026

Nature of Disposal

Contested--DISMISSED

Last updated 26-May-2026

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.PANCHU RAM SAHU

    Adv. DEVASHISH TIWARI,Shiv SewaK Manjhi,Shiv SewaK Manjhi, ,DINESH YADAV,Deepak Kaushik,Shiv SewaK Manjhi

  2. 2.Kalpana Jhariya

  3. 3.Mamta Singh Raj

  4. 4.Reman Naik

  5. 5.Baburam Dhurve

  6. 6.Rajje Ram Thakur

  7. 7.Indralata Borkar

  8. 8.Ram Prasad Bajare

  9. 9.Kartik Ram Sahu

  10. 10.Ramkhilawan Janghel

  11. 11.Rupchand Yadav

  12. 12.Komal Chand Netam

  13. 13.Kiran Singh Rajput

  14. 14.Sushil Kumar Sahu

  15. 15.- Bhavana Jaiswal

  16. 16.Girdhari Singh Netam

  17. 17.Newendra Singh Parmar

  18. 18.Rajesh Kumar Sharma

  19. 19.Hemant Kumar Dhurve

  20. 20.Gajanand Patil

  21. 21.Sanjeet Singh Raj

  22. 22.Reena Sukhdeve

  23. 23.Dropati Thakur

  24. 24.Jati Lal Jaiswal

  25. 25.Chhabiram Markam

  26. 26.Sunil Kumar Dewangan

  27. 27.Bodhan Singh Kaushik

  28. 28.Dileep Kumar Dhurwe

  29. 29.Yogesh Kumar Dhruw

  30. 30.Bhagwani Singh Patil

  31. 31.Sohan Lal Shrivastava

  32. 32.Sanjay Kumar Sahu

  33. 33.Nirmal Singh Meravi

  34. 34.Neetu Punacha

  35. 35.Santosh Kumar Deshlahare

  36. 36.Daneshwari Tiwari

  37. 37.Kamlesh Kumar Chandrawanshi

  38. 38.Santosh Kumar Meravi

  39. 39.Gajanand Sonwani

  40. 40.Madhuri Sahu

  41. 41.Sarawati Janghel

  42. 42.Manohar Singh Mandavi

  43. 43.Hemraj Sinha

  44. 44.Dhanesh Kumar Janghel

  45. 45.Bhagwat Jaiswal

  46. 46.Mukesh Kumar Kulhara

  47. 47.Surendra Sahu

  48. 48.Ramprasad Patel

  49. 49.Kamlesh Kumar Jhariya

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.STATE OF CHHATTISGARH Advocate - A.G.

  2. 2.State of Chhattisgarh

  3. 3.Director

  4. 4.Commissioner Cum Director

  5. 5.District Education Officer

  6. 6.Chief Executive Officer

  7. 7.Chief Executive Officer

  8. 8.Chief Executive Officer

  9. 9.Block Education Officer

  10. 10.Block Education Officer

Case History

  1. Case disposedDisposed

  2. 16-Apr-2026

    Hon'ble The Chief Justice,Hon'ble Shri Justice Ravindra Kumar AgrawalView PDF

    Case Summary: WA 307/2026 - Panchu Ram Sahu & Others v. State of Chhattisgarh Court Decision: The High Court of Chhattisgarh dismissed the appeal, upholding the Single Judge's dismissal of the writ petition. Key Issue: 49 Shiksha Karmi (teacher) employees appointed by Panchayat Department (1998-2008) sought pay scale benefits under the Government's 10.03.2017 Circular after their absorption into the School Education Department in 2018, claiming parity with similarly placed teachers. Court's Reasoning: The court held that Panchayat-appointed Shiksha Karmi employees cannot claim benefits under the 10.03.2017 Circular (meant for State Government employees) because: (1) they were Panchayat Department employees until 2018, not Government servants; (2) the absorption order explicitly restricted arrears benefits before 01.07.2018; (3) their prior service conditions were governed by Panchayat rules, not Government rules; and (4) they lack similar situational equivalence to Government-appointed teachers, making parity claims unjustified. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

  3. 16-Apr-2026

    Fresh Matters

    Hon'ble The Chief Justice , Hon'ble Shri Justice Ravindra Kumar Agrawal

  4. 28-Feb-2026

    Case filed

    Registration No. WA/307/2026

casestatus.in Summary

Case Summary: WA 307/2026 - Panchu Ram Sahu & Others v. State of Chhattisgarh Court Decision: The High Court of Chhattisgarh dismissed the appeal, upholding the Single Judge's dismissal of the writ petition. Key Issue: 49 Shiksha Karmi (teacher) employees appointed by Panchayat Department (1998-2008) sought pay scale benefits under the Government's 10.03.2017 Circular after their absorption into the School Education Department in 2018, claiming parity with similarly placed teachers. Court's Reasoning: The court held that Panchayat-appointed Shiksha Karmi employees cannot claim benefits under the 10.03.2017 Circular (meant for State Government employees) because: (1) they were Panchayat Department employees until 2018, not Government servants; (2) the absorption order explicitly restricted arrears benefits before 01.07.2018; (3) their prior service conditions were governed by Panchayat rules, not Government rules; and (4) they lack similar situational equivalence to Government-appointed teachers, making parity claims unjustified. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

District Courts Supreme Court
Search Another Case