a $§ngw gm’iw IN THE HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT: BILASPUR W.P. No. 483 2. OF 2004 l’ETITIONER: /I/(hushi Ram Verma, aged 63 years, son of ~late Shri Raja Ram Verma, resident of Village & post office Mopka, Tehsil Bhatapara, District Raipur (Chhattisgarh). // VERSUS / RESPONDENTS (1) State of Chhattrsgarh through the Secretary, Department of Revenue Ralpur WV?) The District Collector, Raipur (C.G.) (3) Sub Divisional Officer, Bilaigarh, “district Raipur (C.G.) (4) Tehsildar, Kasdol, district Raipur (C.G.) z WRIT PETITION UNDER ARTICLE 226/227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA FOR ISSUANCE OF WRIT IN THE NATURE OF CERTIORARI, MANDAMUS AND FOR OTHER SUITABLE WRIT: ORDER, AND DIRECTION. XI—HC-78 WRNO. 4832 2am? Wm‘...0oooo.ooooto m 200 WW (13W) WWW WW#WW wmm %3w%tr311%¥f mmw O9. 10.2006 Shm‘ Somnath Verma, counsel for mepetitioner. Shn‘ Anni Sao. Govt. Ad vocate, for the State] 1‘63pondsnts. Arguments Imam. Orilgr dictated as follows: QRDEK n 1n annal y LVvéuvU’ §unii Kumar Sinna, q Th6 neu'tionsr. who is a retired Patwwi; has; flled this netition for isSuance of direciion to the authorities of the State to The bm'ef facts. which c e almost admitted in this case: are that the Detitioner was retir on 31.3.2003 and thereafter, he is runniné from pillar to poet n account of non-payment of retjral benefits as also arrears of etc. When nothing was paid, he was constrained to file this pe ition on 10.12.2004. r ReDlV to the writ pet has been tiled by the State. In tiara-‘2 of reply, it has been n1 ntioned that the petitioner remained absent from dutv from .01 4.1994 to 33.6.1994, 12/ 1994 to 2/1995. 3! 1995 to 10/ 1995, 1.12.1998 to 30.9.1999, 20.5.2002 to 6.8.206‘0 and Avril 2002 t March 2003 without assigning any cause and/or Without giving application for leave. Therefore, his salaw for the said peri “a“; y was withheld and he was asked to o e s _‘ i n 1wmm \ \ XI—HC-78 53 D mm,mi§mgi W‘P' R833,— WWOOOO¢O¢OOOOO§‘O¢Q§0’Q0 IH 200 L7, mm<W> Wimffwm wmm WWW «l— I %3T%wan%n Th‘eréaftér, his; case, was foxwardéd to reSpondentno2 bV , Iiispcndent no.3 for sanctioning tha leave and for~pr€naration of pension case and 1'11 fact, tht: dday was caussd bccauss of 110n— flling of the. applications for those pcm’ods in time by the, octitioner. l) The State has £11550 mod a document Annexure R—l which qocs to Show that on 19.3.2004, H16 Sub—Divisional Oficer. Bilaigarh. Dislt. Raipur {CG} has $ert a memo to tho Collcctor (Land RecordS}, Rainur. in this'rcqarl. Loarnod counsel for the State Submits that aftcr filing of thc appropm'aic apph'cation in this“ regard, some delav has been caused, but his submisa‘ion is that he hag; received information that the case of the petitioner is being finalized verV soon and it shall be finalized within a veiy short period and the Qiievance of the petitioner would be redresised. This Court does not know as to what is the short period of the State, hut it knows well that when the retiral dues of an employf e, Particularly: a low maid emnlovee. i are not paid in time, he]sl.e in his/her old age. faces much hardship even after earnings made by him] her, after rendering his services to the master pameiilaxly to the State as in the ni‘esent case. This hardship must be realized by the authorities of the State while considering any :ase regaitling finalization of retired dues and also regardmg-fmaliaation of the post-rental benefits like nension etc. Bethat as it may, for the time being, resneotinq the assurance given by the State before passing anv harsh order in this matter, I deem it appropiiate to afford one onnottunitv to the Z” P.T.O.‘ n XI-HC-78 Wm \ 5W %?’ ...f.o~‘ EH; 200k, mm (W) WW m®w §1WW Ewawi%aan%¥1 ‘ry authorities of tha State to fmz ‘ this I grant 4 months’ Time fr orclgr‘to satle the case of £11 them. It is- made char that finalized, at any rate, Wit} Authorities‘ the ‘ne‘ritioner shdJ in such an event he shall alsw to navment of interest on t] liabilities on the concerned a1 With the aforesaid o stands fmallv disnosed o'f at t‘ Certified copy of the e Counsel‘ free of cost, who s authorities concerned so tha service of this order on the ‘ communicate this order alon this writ petition. C.c. as her rules. llize the case of the petitioner and for 3m the date of communication of this e netitioner which is mending hefore if the case of the petitioner is not 1in i the said. period by the State {ill be free to approach this Court and h be free to make a Graver in relation 1e amoimt withheld. fixing personal ithorities of the State in this regard, hservations i l directions, V this petition his stage. irder shall be sunnlied to the State i hall communicate the same to the t the further delay may not occur in authorities. The netitioner may also P- r with a representation and a. Copy of Sd/- K Sunil Kumar Sinha Judge P.T.O.