HIGH COURT OF (?fiHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR M WRIT PETITIGN (S) No. 257 of20tl8 PETITIONE : Nanki Sahu S/o Shri Dayamm Sahu, aged about 60 years, working as Gangman, Depamnem of P.W.D. Sarangarh, Resident of Village & Post ~‘ (C.G.) Dansara, Tahsil Sarangarh, Dism'ct. Raigarh VERSUS RESPONDENTS : 1. Staxe of Chhattisgarh: ibrough its Secretaly, Public Works Depamnent, Mantralaya, DKS. BhaWan, The Sub Divisional Omcer, Pubh'c Works Depamnem, Sarangarh, Tahsil Sarangarh, Dist. Raigarh (CG) Raipur (C.G.) WRIT PETI’HON UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF mDIA B: Ho’bie Shri Satish K. m Present: Shri R.S.Patel, Advoéate for the petitioner. $1m' Arvind Dubey, Panel Lawyer for the State/respondents. QRAL ORDER (Passed an 14m day of January, 2008) I. By this petition, the petitioner, who has worked as Gangman (pennanent), seeks a relief that the petitioner being permanent gangman be reiired at the age of 62 years in accordance with the Chhattisgarh Shashkiya Sevak (Adhivarshiki-Ayu) Adhiniyam, 1967 (for short ‘the Act, 1967’) read with Fundamental Rule (for short ‘F.R. ’) 56. 2. According to learned counsel for the petitioner, the petitioner attained the status of permanent employee, as defined under Rule 2(c) of the Chhattisgarh (Workcharged and Contingency Paid Employees) Pension Rules: 1979 (for short ‘the Rules, 1979), named under Article 309 of the Constitution of India. Alter having attained the status of the permanent employee, the petitioner would retire on attaining the age of 62 years on superannuation under the provisions ofthe Act, 1967. 3. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would submit that the case of the petitioner is squarely covered by the decision ofthis Court passed on 4““ {ii @ R S n A ‘ o J. @ , January, 2007 in W.P. No. 108/2005 (Govind Vs. State of Chhattisgarh & Others) and other connected matters. Learned counsel appearing for the respondentslState does not dispute the submission made by leamed counsel for the petitioner. Accordingly, the petitioner, who is permanent gangman, is entitied to retire on attaining the age of 62 years in accordance with the Act, 1967. The petition is accordingly allowed, subject to verification ofthe facts. No order as to costs. i ?d/\' r i e x ,i Satish K. Agnihotri Judge