^ L^f c^y6°-7/o ^ :BEFORE THE M.F.STATE AQMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNA : JABAPUR O.A.NO.- A<\M i'2-?)OF 1997_ ffiPLT.CMT t- Dr. Manharanlal Aganval S/o S hri D.P.Agarvi'al aged about <a^gi!A-UCTAsi. 6'^years resident o f 13, S-eh&eJ.-,^^ Cho'ube Colony Raipyr, Tahsil and Dtstrict Raipur (i';!P)'. .. V E R S U S MON-APPLICA'fl y^pf 'J. /JThe State of A.iaeihya Pradesh _ .. ,/,- (Through the S ecretary, I':oalth' ^^-Nnl^fj^%fyrSRt vauabh d5' .0' 2. Th'e Bire'ctor Tecl'inical Educafion .. Direetrate Teel-inical Education of M.P. ^ot-th fioor , Satpuda Bhavi/an, Bhopal-462004( ). . principal Govt. 'College ofj Engineering, y^^aJEK, isxRx Bilaspur (MP). \, .Ac»^.3I^n^r»^o^^^,M^K Gi^ca'o^- cM'f^^^^"10, %so,'rl)*°^,T; DETAILS.OF. ^PLICATION ^^ ^Chh^^yv.b . (^^.(&^ i ^: ;liil ^^ ^.i. -* HIQH COURT OF CHHATTISGARHAT BILASPUR (Hon. Mr. Justice Pritinker Diwaker) WritPetition (S) No. 1607 of 2005 IK;:!i BSi^ latia'; PETITIONER RESPONDENTS VERSUS Dr.Manharanla] Agarwal State of Madhya Pradesh and others ^^SiSs •''URBaSS'. Shri Pankaj Agrawal counsel forthe petitioner. Shri Rajiv Shrivastava counsel for respondents 1 & 2. Shri Pravin Das Dy. GAfOrrespondentNo.3. Shri Raghvendra Pradhan counsel for respondent No.4. WRITPETLTION UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF THE CONSTITUTIONOFINDIA ORDER (30.8.2010) In the present petition the petitioner has prayed for the following reliefs;,; 9.1 On Rs.2,11,856 inferest at the rate ofRs. 12% per anrii.im for November 96, December 96 and January 97 whict'j comes to Rs. 6356 only be granted. Likewise in F.B.F: an'cl G.I.S. payment interest granted up to 30:4.96 alttioug^ Annexure A/12 dated 4.1.97, the actual payment reeeivecl in fhemonfh of February 1997, the inferest from 1.5;9&jf(l! 31.1.97 be paid thereon Likewise in excess adclitjpriaj payment of Rs. 400 interest be awarded from the date^ deduction i.e. February 88 to August 88 andJulySS^fl.t payment ahd Rs. 100 excess payment for June, Jyly,^8i the refunded with interest from the date ofdeduefion payment. , . , , • 9.2 Costs ofthepetition beawarded;and li 3.3 Any other relief ordirectJonwhichtheHon'bleTribunalmayl deems fitbe alsoawarded. I 2. Counsel for the petitioner submits that during the pendency.ofthe presehtwrit petition almost the entire amount has been paid to the:petitioneF except Rs. 500 (Rs. 400 towards illegal deduction made from him and Rs. •:r f: f-' ::^.'j;.°- w.K :UE Vk v^f. 'i-'li se R B@. ^'t's: -^- . / : • ; • '71 towards Family Benefit Fund) along with interest. He submits thatthe petifionet is fighting for his claim since 1997 and ends of justice would be sen/ed if g| direction isissued to the State of Madhya Pradesh for considering the case,o< petitioner in acoordance with law for the payment of this amount pf Rs.SOGj along with interest. He further submits that the State of Madhya Pradesh may be directed to decide the case of the petitioner as expeditiously as pQssible. 3. Shri Rajiv ShriVastava, Advocate representing the State of Madhya Pradesh very fairly submits that the representation if made by the petitioneif would be considered and decided in accordance with lawas eariyas possible. A. In view of above, the petition is disposed of with direction that if thq,; petitioner makes a representation to the State Government of Madhya Pradesl"),; •;,:ll'd; within a period of two months from today, the same shall be decided by it in? accordance with law within a further period ofthree monthsfrom the date of it? reGelpt. —~—— Sd/- Pritinker Diwaker Judge rt!l;HK^KSll ^illSSI '[•M •j'