JUDGMENT : P. Sam Koshy, J. The relief sought for by the petitioner in this petition is for a direction to the respondents to consider the case of the petitioner so far as past service that the petitioner has rendered as Shiksha Karmi Grade-I for the purpose of counting total length of service. 2. The facts of the case is that, the petitioner was initially appointed as Shiksha Karmi Grade-I on 10.07.1998 vide Annexure P/1. Having served the departments for a period of little more than 7 years, the petitioner vide Annexure P/2 tendered her resignation on personal reasons. For ready reference, the contents of the resignation letter is reproduced hereinunder: ^^fuosnu gS fd eS 16-7-1998 ls f'k{kkdehZ oxZ&1¼HkkSfrdh½ ds in ij 'kkldh; mPprj ek/;fed fo|ky; flyngk fodkl[kaM iFkfj;k esa inLFk gwzWA esjk LokLFk; Bhd u gksus ds dkj.k eSa vius dk;Z dks lgh rjhds ls ugh dj ikus ds dkj.k vius in ls R;kxin ns jgh gwW ftls rRdky izHkkoh ekuk tk;sA^^ 3. Later on, the petitioner again applied for the post of Shiksha Karmi vide fresh recruitment process that was initiated in the year, 2014 and the petitioner got selected and an order of appointment was issued on 20.08.2014 (Annexure P/3). The petitioner worked with the respondents under Zila Panchayat, Janjgir Champa till 2017 when she again tendered her resignation from her post in district Janjgir Champa vide Annexure P/5, dated 30.11.2017. The contents of the second resignation letter also is reproduced here in under for ready reference- ^^lknj fuosnu gS fd eSa Jhefr oanuk eqnfy;kj O;k[;krk ¼HkkSfrdh½ 'kkldh; mPprj ek/;fed fo|ky; vdyljk fodkl[kaM+ tStSiqj esa inLFk gwWA O;kie }kjk vk;ksftr O;k-ia- PRL, NRL ijh{kk 2017 esa esjk p;u jktukanxkao ftys es gks x;k gSA vr% eSa O;k-i- tkatxhj pkaik ftys ls R;kxi= nsrh gwWA bls rRdky izHkko'khy djus dh d`ik djsA 4. The said resignation letter was accepted by the department on 15.12.2017 (Annexure P/13) and the petitioner stood relieved. 5. What is also relevant at this juncture to take note of is that the petitioner had tendered her second resignation letter on the ground of her being selected in a recruitment process initiated in district Rajnandgaon and therefore she intends to resign from her service from district Janjgir Champa. As per contention of the petitioner, she subsequently has joined her service in Rajnandgaon district and is still working as Shiksha Karmi Grade-I in Rajnandgaon. 6. As per contention of the petitioner, she subsequently has joined her service in Rajnandgaon district and is still working as Shiksha Karmi Grade-I in Rajnandgaon. 6. The prayer which the petitioner now makes is that the department may be directed to consider the past services that the petitioner has rendered during the period 10.07.1998 to 16.01.2006 and again for the period between 20.08.2014 and 15.12.2017 when she has tendered her second resignation letter. 7. The counsel for the petitioner referring to the judgment of this court in case of Mukesh Patel Vs. State of Chhattisgarh & Ors. WPS No.2530 of 2017 submits that the reference in those judgments and circulars of the State Govt. is only the past service rendered by the concerned employee. It nowhere reflects that continuity of service was required. Accordingly, the petitioner's past service from 1998 to 2006 and again from 2014 onwards should be taken into account for the purpose of counting total length of service. 8. The State counsel opposing the petition submits that it is a case where there is a clear break in service each time the petitioner has resigned from service. Therefore the petitioner would not be entitled for the benefit of circulars issued by the State Govt. so also the judgment in case of Mukesh Patel (Supra) would not be applicable in a straight jacket formula to the facts of the present case. 9. Having heard the contentions put forth on either side and on perusal of records, what is admittedly clear is that the first appointment of the petitioner was under Zila Panchayat, Bilaspur vide order dated 10.07.1998 on the post of Shiksha Karmi Grade-I. The post on which the petitioner worked till 16.01.2006. On 16.01.2006 the petitioner had tendered her resignation on the ground of her ill health and on the ground that because of ill health she was unable to discharge her duties and since then the petitioner was not working till she got a fresh appointment in the year 2014 again as Shiksha Karmi Grade-I in district Janjgir Champa. 10. From the aforesaid factual matrix of the case, it is evidently clear that there was a clear break in service of more than 8 years between January, 2006 to August, 2014. 10. From the aforesaid factual matrix of the case, it is evidently clear that there was a clear break in service of more than 8 years between January, 2006 to August, 2014. Moreover, the resignation letter Annexure P/2 and the wording therein coupled with the fact that there is a break in service of 8 years would definitely establish that the resignation was not a technical resignation and there was no continuity of service which would enable the petitioner to claim the benefit of continuity of service and for counting of past service rendered under Zila Panchayat, Bilaspur. However, so far as subsequent appointment i.e. vide Annexure P/3 dated 20.08.2014 and the resignation of the petitioner dated 30.11.2017 would show that the contents of the resignation was on account of fresh appointment that the petitioner had got in district Rajnandgaon. That, the petitioner thereafter seems to have immediately joined at Rajnandgaon and there also appears to be continuity of service between the service rendered by the petitioner under Zila Panchayat, Janjgir Champa and her subsequent appointment under Zila Panchayat, Rajnandgaon. 11. Thus, so far as this period from 2014 is concerned, the respondent authorities would take a decision in the light of the judgment passed in case of Mukesh Patel (Supra) and also the order dated 17.05.2013 regarding grant of revised pay scale on completion of 8 years of service. 12. Let the respondent authorities consider the case of the petitioner in the aforesaid backdrop so far as service rendered by the petitioner from 20.08.2014 onwards and an appropriate decision be taken at the earliest preferably within a period of four months from the date of receipt of copy of this order. 13. It is made clear that for the period between 1998 to 2006, this court has clearly held that the said period cannot be considered for the purpose of counting past service for grant of revised pay scale. 14. Accordingly, the writ petition stands disposed of.