.L \a-ff) Sin< 5.^. IN THE HON'BLE HIGH COURTOF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR (C.G.) WRIT PETITION(S)NO. /2011 PETITIONER '.^Ss VERSUS RESPONDENTS . ^y- ^•y.-/l ^.-•^'..-""^ .•\APV' ^y^-J<y .. ^•'^ <y^^- ^^ ^ MAHESH KUMAR SINGH Ageabout 65 Years; S/o Shri Tope Nath Singh, Retired as PermanentGangman, R/o Village-Chhal,Tahsil- Dharamjaigarh, District— Raigarh (C.G.) 1. State ofChhatiisgarh, Through its Secretary, Department of Public Works, Mantralaya, D. K. S. Bhavan, Raipur(C.G.) 2. Executive Engineer, Public Works DepartmentRaigarh, District-Raigarh (C.G.) 3. "Sub Divisional Officer Public Work (B&R) Department Sub Division Kharsia, District— Raigarh (C.G.) £_ WRIT PETITION UN DER ARTICLE 226 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA. t ^ [C-.7S vv ^w SW'i 3?qR? ijREpti *<l*i<tl 9hW9h T^ -fww^, •sx\\ww, fs<<-)iy^< ^L^.^g^/n "WI, 200 SIT^T 'q^? (l^i!^«i<tr) TOiim^ftgsn^i SB: Hon'bie Snri IViamndra Mohan Shrivastava. J. 10-08-2011 Shri Yogesh Pandey, co(<nsei for the petitioner. copy. Shri Praveen Das, Dep Learned counsei for th pension because the petitiorl permanent Head Majdoor. He| pension of one, who is a perm|anent empioyee has been considered and decided in the case of M.A. Hakim Noi.4135/04), Sone Sai Sahu v. State of C.G. and others the petitioner m the light of the Learned State counsei wouid be considered by the co| this Court in the case of M.A.I Bai (supra). !n view of the submissij proper to direct respondent N<} pension, in accordance with iaji With the aforesaid obset ^iPlfFFT^ WRTf <[ fB^t TfW?R ^affinsn^n |ty Government Advocate for the State on advance petitioner submits that the petitioner is entitled to er was appointed in a regular scaie and was submits that the issue with regard to entitlement of State of Madhya Pradesh and others (W.P.tS) [. State of C.G. CW.P.(s) No.3572/05 and Jhunia Bai (W.P.i'S) No. 2884/09). Learned counseifor the petitioner submits that the resriondent authorities have not considered the claim of feforesaid decisions. iubmits that the caseor the petitioner and his ciaim hipetent authoritv in the iight of the iaw laid down by 1-takim (supra), Sone Sai Sahu (Supra) and Jhunia ns made by the iearned State counsei, it wouid be 2 to consider the claimof the petitioner for grant of and decide the same expeditiously. vations, the petition is finally disposed off. _ ^a»^-tava "ndra^