HISH COURT <y CHHATTISSARH AT BILA^UR '. P.fS) No. 2099 of 2007 Petitioner Versus Respondents Smt. Ram Bai D/o-Bisahu Aged about 59 yece's, Permcnent Sangmcin, R/o Chikhli District- Rsjnaidgaon (C.&.) 1. State of Chhattisgarh Through ths 5ecretary, Public Works Deportment, &.K.5. Bhawan, Raipur (C.6.) 2. Sjb-Divisiona! Officer Sub-Diyssion No. 1, C.&. PW&, PW& Office, Rajnsndgson, Oistrict- ftojnand9aon (C.G.) SB: Hon'ble Mr. Justice Satish K. ^nihotri, J Present: ttr. Ravi Maheshvmri, Advocote for the petitioner. Mr. Vinay Pandey, Pane! Lawyer for fne State/respondents. OR D E R !rt (Passed on -riiis 4Tn Day of April, 2007) 1. By this petition, tearned counse! appearing for the petitioner submits that the petitioner Wfas employed in the year 1978 ds permonent 6angma"i in Public Works Depar-tment and the petitioner, »+io has worked for more than 25 years as Gongnan seeks a reiief that the )etitioner heing permanent 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 Fundamenta! Ru!e (for short 'F.R.')56. 2. According to learned counsel for the petitioner, the petitioner attained the status of permanent emptoyee, as defined under Rule 2(c) of the Chhati'isgarh (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 employee the petitioner would retire on attainting the age of 62 years on supercmnuation under the provisions of the Acf 1967. . Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner wouid submit that the case of the petitioner is squarely covered by -riie decision of -rtiis Court passed on 4th January, 2007 in WP. No. 108/2005 (Sovind Vs. State of Chhattisgarh & others) and other connected matters. 4. ugarnsd counse! cppearing for the respondents/State does not dispute the submissions made by Searned counsel for the petitioner. 5. Accordingly, the petitioner, who is permanent gangmui, is entitled to retire on ati-aining the age of 62 years in accordance wi-tti tiie Act, 1967. The petition is accordingly allowed. No order as to costs. Sd/- Satish K. Agnihotri Judge Thakur