“gov C? C‘s]! %’ BEFORE THE HON’BLE HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR W.P. No.3 4’43 Of 2004. PETITIONER :- LP. Rathore, son of Deoprasad Rathore, aged about 75 years; Retired Principal, Higher Secondary School, Resident of Portha, Tahsil Shakti, District Bilaspur (Chhattisgarh) State of Chhattisgarh, through Secreta- ry, Ministry of School Education, Secretariat, D.K.S. Bhawan, Raipur (Chhattisgarh), .The Director, Public Instructions Secretariat, Pension Bada, Raipur (Chhattisgarh), . The Deputy Director Education, District Janj gir-Champa (Chhattisgarh), . The Joint Director, Treasury Account and Pension, The State of Chhattisgarh, Bilaspur (Chhattisgarh), 5. The Principal, Govt. Higher Secondary School, Baraduar, District Janj gir— Champa (Chhattisgarh). PETITION UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF CONSTITUTION OF INDIA ETAILS OF PETITION :- 1 PARTICULARS OF PETITIONER :- As above in title. 2. PARTICULARS OF RESPONDENTS :- As above in title. 3. ORDER AGAINST WHICH THE PETITION IS BEING MADE :— (i) Order no. :— The respondents are not giving benefits Contd..2.. :u L ED ' ‘ . wam zMgfégjw saw m (Wm WWW WW§§$W %;aff?man%§1 28.01.2005 Shri Pankaj Agrawal, couns far the petitioner. Shri Sudhir Agrawal, Pan l Lawyer for the State/respondent No. 1 on advance copy‘ Heard. Learned counsel for the pe itioner submits that earlier to this writ petition, the petitioner had f1 ed original application before the M.P. State Administrative Tribunal, Jabalpur as O.A. No.2728 of 199 l. This original application was filed lor a direction to the respondents to count the past services rendered by e petitioner under local authorities prior to the date of taking over of e institution by the Government for the purposes of pensionary benefit and pay him gratuity, pension etc. Learned Administrative Tribuna decided the aforesaid original application by order AnneXure-P/l. e copy ofthe order passed by the S.A.T. is placed on record at p ge 6. The copy of the original applcation filed by the petitioner i also filed on record at page 9. Para 12 of the order passed in T.A. No. 589/88 by the Tribunal which also decides 0A. No. 2728/91 is quoted as under:- “The State Go ernmemf implemented decision of the High Court in Bh khare ’s case and did notfzle any dppedf. Therefore, {l1 State Government cannot give a dwefrencidl treatmen to the applicants. The'respondents are, therefore, direct d to count the entire service ofthe applicants including iose under the local bodies for the// 17/7000‘50,OOO. / /. GRPRJ FS/350 h h s \‘\‘\ o 4, WW @209 611%w (Wu) WWW 1? WWW WWW§WW $aimm¥r Wmm _ 2‘ purposes of counfz'ng the number ofyears of service rendered by them for caiculazion of the pensionary beneffts.” Learned counsel for the getitioner submits that according to the aforesaid order, it was directe s that the respondents shall count the entire service of the petitioner ' eluding those under the local bodies for the purposes of counting the umber of years of service rendered by them for calculation of the pensionary benefits. However, respondents have not given benefits of th part of the order to the petitioner. Learned counsel also submits t at the notice under Section 8O of the C.P.C. was given on 1.8.200 but even aher‘the said notice, the respondents have not taken any ecision in this regard. During the course of guments, learned counsel for the petitoner pryas that the petitione may be given an opportunity to tile a detailed representation along Wi h copy of this order and copy. of the writ petition and concerned resp ndents may be directed to decide the same within stipulated peri by passing a reasoned order' in accordance with law. This limited prayer of 1e rned counsel for the petitioner is not opposed by counsel for the State. The prayer is allowed. The petitioner may file a detailed representation before the respondent No. 2 within a perid of 15 days from today along with GRPRJ‘FSESO—lz/ZO OU 50,000. i r o QA M‘RNO‘ 344-3 2W4 wzoo mmm wmm copy of vm't petition and copy oft filed, respondem No. 2 is direct‘ reasoned order on each points rais: 4 months from the date of receipt/f1 With the aforeSaid obser disposed of. Certified copy as per rules. his order and if such representation is ad to decide the same by passing a :d by the petitioner within a period of ling ofthe representation. rations, the petition stands finally Sdl— l Sunil Kumar Sinha Judge “ha/1r-