IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BILASPUR (CHHATTISGARHl WRIT PETITION No. _^^1^_/2003 / PETITIONER RESPONDENTS <. ^ 7^-^^ ^y ^\^£^^' HETRAMMIRRE Aged about 60 years, S/o Late Shri M.R.Mirre, R/oVillage Khaparidih Tahsil and Distt. Janjgir Champa VERSUS 1. The State 6f Chhattisgarh through Secretary Panchyat and Rural Department, DKS Bhawan, Raipur. 2. Chief Executive Officer, Janpad Panchyat,Patheriya, Tahsil Mungeli, Distt. Bilaspur ^\vv:^^ ^l^ 3. Chief Executive Officer, Jila Panchyat, Bilaspur. ^L——--- „—— .——.- --^- /^- PETITION UNDER ARTICLE 22^ & 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA ^ ^•^ C:r XI-HC—78 ^-sr '^'f^Rra, ^t^Fi^, 1®T^ray , ^ P ^ r3^)^> ^?t?r^^v (*^i^^) 3?i1^i'^T^N' ^^T3?1^T'^&TO' 06.02.2004 Shri Parag Kotecha, couns| Shri P. Das, Panel Lawyer,| 226 & 227 ofthe Constitution ofl the in.action on fhe part of fhe rej As per fhe petitioner's casj ^ ^ y for fhe petitioner. for fhe State. The petitioner has prefer^d this writ petition under Article India beiag aggrieved on account of spondents. s he was appoiated as Gram Sevak on 02/08/1965 aad thereafter |ie was promoted on 01.08.1998 as Developxnent Extension Officer jaad frora fh.at post he retired on 30,06.2003. After retireinent thel petitioner has made representation to fhie conceraed aufhonties fo pension aiid other retrial ben< ^ releasiiig his 2^2 nionfhs salaiy, ^fits but the respondents are not petitioner, therefore, he subniit^ to inake a representation to th^ releasiag his salaiy, pension, gijatuity aad other retrial benefits for which fhe petitioner is entitl^d, fherefore, fhe respondents be directed to pay fhe retdal benefi1|s aad iaterest thereon @ 18%, Leamed couiisel for t|ie petitioner submits that the respondents O&S^not considerin| fhe representatiou made by fhe that fhe petitioner may be allowed respondent No,l and respondents ^ XI-HC-22 ^TT^r'SFT '^IW^I^T 5CTNF 'ui^d 1^^ +- ^ =p ^? ^l^Krt^ ^I^TH^, M<rii^^ ^wmr^p-iio^ 3iT^T 'q^W _...^.f....^....^.L^ fl^ ^TT^I ^^T83T'^T No. 1 may be directed to decide wifhin a period of one montit|L, to which leamed coiinsel for respondents has no objection. Haviag heard the leamed atlowed to inake a detailed repres ten days froin today and ui tum concemed aufhorities to consid ^1^{<V<^1<1 tTO^f ^ fe^ <!^^t< '^'N^w^n^T ^Iie pension case ot ttie petitioner ^ounsel for the pardes aad haviag regard to the facts aad circumLSt^nces of fhe case, fhe petitioner is ^ntation to respondent No. 1 wifhia , respondent No, 1 shall direct fhe er fhe case of thLe petitioner for 4 pension aad retrial benefits aii(jl graat fhe retrial benefits to tiie petitioner which are adiaissible tcj With fhe aforesaid directioij hiTn as perniles. fhe petition staads disposed of Consequentiy M.W.P. No.3^88 / 2003 also staads disposed of. Certified copy as per Rules,) Sd/- L.C. Bhadoo Judge [^^fe^