@ HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR D.B.: Hon’ble Shri Justice Sunil Kumar Sinha and Hon’ble Shri Justice Radhe Shyam Sharma Writ Appeal No.372 of 2011 Appellant Durga Prasad Pandey, s/o Late Shri S.S. Pandey, aged about 69 years, Retired Lecturer, Government Higher Secondary School, Manendragarh, District Koriya(CG) VerSUS Respondents State of Chhattisgarh through — 1. Secretary, Department of Higher Education, DKS Bhawan, Raipur (CG) 2. Committee constituted for redressing the grievances (retrial dues) of the retired employees, through its Chairman/Secretary, Department of Finance, State of Chhattisgarh, Raipur (CG) 3. Accountant Generai, State‘ of Chhattisgarh, Raipur (CG) 4. Senior Accounts Officer 05 office of the Accountant General, State of Chhattisgarh, Raipur(CG) 5. Principal, Government Higher Secondary School, Manendragarh, District Koriya (CG) Present: Shri Rajendra Patel, counsel for the appellant. Shri Ajit Singh, Panel Lawyer forthe State/respondents No.1 and 5. Writ Appeal under Section 2(1) of the Chhattisgarh High Court (Appeal to Division Bench) Act, 2006 ORAL ORDER (Passed on 19th September, 201 1) , Per Sunil Kumar Snha, J.: i k Heard on admission. V 1T Wt Al 2 2. The appellant has filed this appeal against the order dated 12- 2-2009 passed in Writ Petition (3.) No.921/2009. By the impugned order, the writ petition filed by the appellant has been dismissed by the writ Court. 3. Appellant was a lecturer. He retired on 30-4-2003. According to the calculations made by the appellant, on the retirement, an amount of Rs..93,247/— was standing as balance in his GPF Account. By letter dated 21—1 1-2003, the Senior Accounts Officer informed the appellant that an amount of Rs.63,155/— was found as outstanding balance. In response to the said letter, the appellant filed his reply on 26-12-2003. However, on 30-4-2004, a letter of recovery for amount of Rs.1 ,70,178/— was issued to the appellant. The appellant tiled his reply to this letter also. When the payments were not made to the appellant, he filed Writ Petition No.4536/2004, which was disposed of by a Single Judge of this Court on 31—1-2008 with a direction to respondent No.2/committee to consider the case of the appellant and pass appropriate orders ing accordance with law. Thereafter, the matter was taken-up by respondent No.2/committee. The committee called the appellant, personal hearing was given, officers of the office of Accountant General were also present and they displayed their records before the committee. On the basis of material produced before it, the committee found that in the passbook retained by the appellant, 11 entries were not made by Drawing and Disbursing Officer. The details of those entries have l been mentioned in the decision of the committee tiled as Annexure P—2. After reconciling the said entries, certain amount was r “ea xv @ calculated and the matter was disposed of. The appellant thereafter filed an other Writ Petition (S.) No.921/2009 challenging the decision of the committee (Annexure P-2). 4. The writ Court found that the decision of the committee was based on sumcient material which were placed before the committee during the course of hearing and the committee has disposed of the matter on due verification of the accounts. The writ Court, therefore, dismissed the writ petition. 5. Learned counsel for'the appellant could not point out as to how the decision of the committee was bad in law. The committee, in paragraph 8 of its decision, has given details about various entries which were not made in the accounts of the appellant. 6. After going through the contents of decision of the committee (Annexure P-2) as also the impugned order passed by the learned Single Judge, we do not find any infirmity or illegality so as to interfere in this intra-Court appeal. .ALk 7. The appeal, therefore, is liable to be and is hereby dismissed Gopal . ; .q\ W V. summarily. Sd/- Sdl— SUNIL KUMAR SINHA f: Radhe Shyam Sharma Judge Judge