HIGH COURT OF CHHATTESGARH AT BILASEJR WRIT PETITION (S) No. 2783 of 2m}? : Smt, R..AxLabhsetwar Wife of Shri Anand ?ETITIONER Labhsetwar, ageci about 63 years, Retired AJNAM" ReSident of Village Laiitpur, Post Paiela, Tahsil and Police Station Shapur, District Surguja (CG) VERSUS RESPONDENTS : 1. Stata of Chhattisigarh, Through: The Secretary, Department of Health and Family Weifare, D.K.S. Bhawan, Raipur (C.G.). 2: The Chief Medical and Health OmQer, Ambikapur, Districi Surguja (C.G.) 3. The Block Medical Officer, Community Health Centre Sitapur, District Surguja, (C.G.) 4. The Senior Account Officer, office of the Accountant General Chhattisgarha Raipur (C.G.} WRIT PETITION UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA. Singie Bench : Hon’ble Justice Shri 'Satish K. Agnihotri. Present: Shn' V,K,Pandey, Advocate for the petitioner, Miss Sunita Jain, Panel Lawyer for the State /’ respondent No. 1 to 3. Mr, SKBeriwal, Advocate for the respondent no. 4, ORDER (Passed on 7m day of May, 2007) Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that the petitioner, while working on the post of A.N~M., retired. .lfrom the services on 31 ,032004 on attaining the age of superannuation. As per her pass book, the total G.P,FK amount payable was Rs. 3,15,960/-. The respondent no. 4 has paid a sum of Rs, 2,27,822/— and the remaining 88,138/— has not been paid to her. The petitioner was replied vide letter dated 14.03.2005 (Annexure PM) without stating the reasons, that the payment cannot he made on the basis of ¢atrie$ in pass book, This appears to be stralxge, The pass book entry is prima facic an authenticated document indicating the payment, Withdrawal etc" A copy of the same is also retained by the office of the Aeeountant Genera}, The letter dated 14.032005 appears to be cryptic and vague, The petitioger has made at detaiied representation Vide letter dated 1406 £005 (Annexme P/5) which is still pending and it has not been replied so far In View of the above; the respondent no: 4 is directed give the reasoned reply and to pass the reasoned order in accordance with law, on its own merit on the representation dated 14.06.2005 (Annexure P/5) pending before the respondent no, 4t in View of the foregoing, this petition stands disposed of with a direction to the respondent no. 4 to decide the representation of the petitioner within a period oftwo monthsNo order as to costs. Sd/— i Satish K. Agnihotri i Judge Amit l