L f s^ff6 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BILASPUR CHHAmSGARH WRIT PETITION N0; 16 i 7 /2004 / PETITIONERS / .^^. ,^y/' ^^ ••^-yy «py\(^" ^.^' .^ 1^^ '^' : RESPONDENTS ^^^ ^ ^lasOUl ^- ew^to S-- 1. Lalla Khan, S / o Jameel, Aged about 48 years R/o Village Dhumka,Post Sonkara, Tahsil- Balod, Distt. t)urg(C.G.) 2. Sukherurani, S/o. Sukhdeo, aged about 56 years, R/o. Village - Kurdi, Post - Dundera, Tahsil - Dunderdehi, District - Durg (C.G.) 3. Khorbhar, S/o. Dukalu, aged about 52 years, R/o. Village Devari Bangla, Post Devari, Tahsil Lohara, District - Durg (C.G,) 4.' Mohanram, S/o. Pancham, aged about 48 years, R/o. Village - Kaldabri, Post Mahrum, Tahsil Rajnandgaon, District- Rajnandgaon (C.G.) Somanath, S/o. Ruhela, aged about 56 years, R/o. Village - Kadhabri, Post - Mahruin, Tahsil Rajnandgaon, District- Rajnandgaon (C.G.) 6. Agarahij, S/o. Kejuram, aged about 59 years, R/o.Village Kamta, Post Dodi Lohara, tahsil Dodi Lohara, District - Durg (C.G.) 7. Ram Prasad, S/o. Ramratan, aged about 47 years, R/b. Village - Karnta, Post Dondi Lohara, District - Durg (C.G.) 8. Punnu Ram, S/o. Anjor, aged about 45 years, R/o. Village - Ureha, Post Dondi Lohara, District - Durg (C.G.) 9. Jagat Ram, S/o. Bodhan Singh, aged aboul. 49 years, R/o. Village - Poplatol (Jatadha), Post - Sahgaon, Dondi Lohara, District - Durg (C.G.) VERSUS State of Chhattisgarh Through-the Secretary, Public Works Departraent, D.K.S. Bhawan, Raipur (C.G.) 2. Finance Secretary, , ^ State of Chhatisgarh, D.K.S. Bhawan, Raipur (C.G.) 3. Sub-Divisional Officer \ •^ Sub-Division No. 1, C.G. PWD, PWD office, Balod, District - Durg (C.G.) 1. ^^ BI'IK; WRIT PETITIONUNDER ARTICLES 226AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA in "oaa ^xS:' & °; XI-HC-78 +11*1MI sh+llch 3^T '^Wlv\'ii, ®Tfl'H'16,Rlclld; ^-.^.^.^(T., ^ 2004_ Sii^i yach (vI^'t'T) sn^rqiTf^ri^; cpn'aii^istitii'ti Cffrfvl.A. ^ grdTWHfN'sn^T 24-1-2007 Mr. Aaoop Majiundar, cof Mr. D.K. Gwalre, Dep^t; respondents. Heard. The case of the petitionej Men ia Siib Divteion No.l, 2003/24-4-2003 (Annexiu-e P-| PWD fhe Gang Mea who have years of age which ever is earl^c offhe Chhattisgarh Public Woj Contingeucy Paid Employee Services Rides, 1976, fbe szipeita Leamed counsel for the is squarely covered by the ord) Court ia fhe inatter of Purshlo ofhei-s W.P.No.3944/2005 and| fhe present petitions who are entifled to continue iu service wifh fhe Chliatdsgarh Adhiniyam, 1967. Accoi-diagly, the writ shail be entitled to contiaue iit accordance with the Act, 1967. unsel for the petitiouers. ty Govt. Aiivocate for the State/ ut cbl'iltt-f^l'f t<l^dTi|:ls'<rl <fSl<^K ^arf^iTsn^r ^s is that they are workmg as Gaag PWD, Balod aad vide oider 2-4- 1) issued by the State Goverxunent, 'oinpleted 30 years of service or 60 :r to retire, whereas, as per Rule 8 rks Departiuent Work Charged and Recruitment and Conditions of itaiuiuation age is 62 years. tietitioners subinits fhat ffais matter sr dated 4th Januaiy, 2007, of this >tum vs. State of Chhattisgarh & conaected writ petitions as such, Ipermanent Gang Men of PWD are ffae age of62 years in accoi-dance Sevak (Adhivarshild-Ayu) du Sh^skiya pe4tion is aUowed and fhe petitioners service tffl fhe age of 62 years in SA/-^-- Acting ChiefJustice P.T.O. s^^?