/!^ ^s- HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPT.TR .^ Writ Petition No. 3545 of2004 PETITIONER J?E.SPONDENTS Snit.Sushila Pargamha, aged 57 years, wife of late Shri Dr. Sharad Kumar Parganiha, resident ofMIG- C-2345, Industrial Estate, Housing Board Bhilai, District Durg (Chhattisgarh). VERSUS L State' of Chhattisgarh, through the Secretar}^ DepartmentofHealth Services, Raipur. 2. The Secretas^/, Department ofFmance, Raipur. 3. The Director of Ayui-ved, Homeopathy & Unani System, Govemment of Chhatiisgarh, Raipur. 4. The Joint Director of Ayurved, through the Director ofAyun/ed, State ofChhattisgai'h, Raipur. 5. The District Officer of Ayurved-cum-Superintendent of Ayurve, office of the Divisional Officer of Ayun'ed, Raipur (Clihattisgarh). 6. The District Officer of Ayus^ed-ciim-Superintendent of Avurved, District Avurved Hospital, Nutan Colony, Bilaspur (ChhattisgaA). 7. Superintendent-cum-District Ayun7ed Officer, Durg (Chhattisgarh). (WRFT PETmON TJNDRR ARTTCLE 226/2P7 OF THE CONSTTTTJTTON OF INDTA) (8B: Hon'Me Mr. K. Agpj»iot!iJ.) PreseBt : Shri'Somiiath Verma, Advocate for the petitioner Shri Alok Bakhshi, Govt. Advocate for the State. ^•\ ORALORDER ^i^ttt (Passed on 29m uay ufApril, 2008) L With the cousent of the pmlies, ihe matter is takesi up for hearing fiiiaNy. 2. This petition pertains to payment ofretiral benefits. 3. This Court, in the matter ofW.P. No. 4642/2004 (Baiinath Mandal Vs. The State of Chhattisgarh and others) aiid crther connected matters, directed the Committee to consider the matter ofthe retiral dues as the disputed question of facts were mvolved. The Committee was constituted by the State Goverament, pm'suant to llie ordei- dated 19.06.2006 passed in W.P. No. 1961/2006 (Smt. Keja Bai Chandrakar Vs. State Govemment asid others) asid order dated 13.03.2008 passed in M.C.C. No. 105/2008 (State of Chhattisgarh and others Vs. Baijnath Mandal and anothei'). Thus, this petition is squarely covered by the judgment and order dated 31st of Januaty, 2008 passed in W.P. No. 4642/2004 (Baynath Mandal Vs. Tlie State of Chhattisgarh and others) and otiier connected matters, as submitted by the leamed counsel appearmg for the parties. 4. This petitioii is disposed of m the same terms i.e. the office of the .ALdvocate Genem! is dire-cted to send the case to.the Committee, within a period of 15 days fi'om the date of receipt of a copy of this order. Thercafter, the Committee shall issue notice to the petitioner and the officers concemed, withina further period of 15 days. The Committee shall consider and pass order, in accordatice with law, after affording proper opportumty of hearing to the petitioner. The petitioner and the officers concemed may file additional documents, if necessary. The entire exercise, isicludmg paymesit of retira! dues, if any, to the petilioner, be completed within a period of four months from the date ofreceipt ofa copy ofthis order. 5. One extra copy ofthe papers of tlw petition shall be supplied by the leamed counsel appearing for the petitioner to Shri Alok Bakhshi, GQMt. Advocate, today itsel^ for oiiward transmission to the committee. 6. No order is necessaiy on I.A. Nos. 01,02 and 03 as the matter has already beeu transfeiTed to the Comimttee. Sd/- Satish K. Agnihotri Judge K ^^ .--«—6--&^——^.....;...^,^, ^^s^..