IN THE HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WRIT PETITION (s)No. [O3 472007 PETITIONERS 1. Rohit Satnami, S/o. Shri Gewar Satnami, Aged about 48 years, R/o. Village Pond, P.O. Abhanpur District Raipur(C.G.). 2. Narsingh Dhimar, S/o.Shri Pancham Dhimar, Aged about 50 years, R/o. Village Pond, P . O. Abhanpur) Dist Raipur(C.G.) /3. Sakha Ram Sahu, u" S/o. Shri Durjan, pp!”h I W “5’ (\gfvqf" Vx,_..- t. Aged R/o. about Chipri 44 Dohi years, Marg, Village - Patewa P.O. Patewa, P.S. Rajim, District Raipur (C.G.) /4. Kesho Ram Sahu, S/o Shri Pursuottam Sahu, aged about 50 years, R/o. Kuli Kurri Patewa Marg,Village Patewa Via Nayapara (Rajim), District Raipur (c.G. ) Derha Ram Yadav, S/o. Shri Gokul Ram Yadav, aged about 50 o‘’ ' §:i:$;,Rl/fg. village Rajim, P.O. Patewa, District Raipur (C.G.) 6. Maksudan Ram Sahu S/O Shekhu Ram Sahu Aged about 56 years R/o village Dongitarai P.O. Abhanpur, District Raipur (C.G.) Leela Ram Sahu S/O Hemu Ram Sahu Aged about 51 years R/o Village Dongitarai P.O. Abhanpur, District Raipur (C.G.) adw¢M“ VERSUS RESPONDENTS l. State of Chhattisgarh, Through the Secretary, G g / Public Works Department, Mantralaya, D.K.S. Bhawan, Raipur (C.G.) Engineer—in—Chief, Public Works Departmet, Raipur (C.G) Executive Engineer, Public Works Department, Raipur (C‘G) sub-Divisional Officer, Public Works Department, Sub—Division No. 3(D&R), Raipur (C.G) / WRIT PETITION UNDER ARTICLE 226[223’ OFm THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA FOR ISSUANCE OF WRIT IN THE NATURE OF CERTIORARI, MANDAMUS, PROHIBITION AND‘ FOR OTHER SUITABLE WRIT OR WRITS, ORDER OR ORDERS, DIRECTION OR DIRECTIONS ETC. r @w HIGH COURT OF CHHMTISGARH AT BILAsPUR W. P.($) Na. 1094 of 2007 Pe‘rifioners : Rohi‘r Safnami and athers Versus Respondenfs S‘m‘re of Chhaffisgar'h and oiher's $3: Hon’ble Mr. Jusfice Safish K. Agnihofri, J Presen‘r: Mrs. Fouzia Mirza, Advocafe for 'the petitioners. Mr. Ajay Dwivedi, Panel lawyer for- ‘l'he Sfa‘l‘e/respondenfs. O R D E R (Passed on ‘fhis 26“ Day of February, 2007) 1. Learned counsel appearing for- fhe peiiiioners submits fhai' fhe ’pefifioner's No. 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 and 7 were appointed on 1.3.83 and ‘I'he pe‘ri‘iioner No. 6 was appointed on 1.10.82 as Work Charged Empioyees and fhe peTiTioners, who have worked for more ihan 25 years as Gangman seeks a relief fha'i fhe petitioners being permanenf gangman be retired at the age of 62 years in accordance with the Chhattisgarh Shaskiya 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 petitioners, the petitioners attained the status of permanent employees, as defined under Rule 2(c) of the Chhattisgarh (Workcharged and Contingency Paid Employees) Pension Rules, 1979 (for short 'the Rules, 1979'), framed under Article 309 of the Constitution of India. After having attained the status of the permanent employees, the petitioners would retire on attainting the age of 62 years on superannuation under the provisions of the Act, 1967. 3. Learned counsel appearing for fhe pe'rifioner-s would submif +haf fhe cases of ihe pefi‘rioners are squarely covered by +he decision of ihis Com passed on 4'“ January, 2007 in,w.P. No. 106/2005 (em/ind Vs. 5fafe of Chha‘itisgarh & others) and other- connec‘i’ed run-tiers. Learned counsel appearing for ihe respondenfs/Si'afe does not dispute the submissions made by leorned counsel for fhe pefii-ioners. 5. The respondeni-s are a? liberi'y 1'0 consider The fac‘l's of ihe case os‘io whe‘rher fhe pe'lii'ioners hove completed 15 years of service as gongman. In 'ihe eveni', i1- is found 'lhaf they have completed 15 years of service, the case shall be governed by the decision of this Court in Govind Vs. State of Chhattisgarh and others (supra). 6. Accordingly, thexpetitioner, who is permanent gangman, is entitled to retire on attaining the age of 62 years in accordance with the Act, 1967. The petition is accordingly allowed. No order as tocoy l Sdl— them l Satish K- Ag“ ‘ Judge /7,,, éabm . }