@ CF-foo/- INTHE HI6H COURT OF CHHATTESGARM AT BILASPUR WRIT PETCTCON FS1 No7^30 of 2010 PETCTEONER: ^^ \y^. ^'?>i¥^' ^••^y ^ ^ ^^^^'^ RESPONDENTS <^'% / ^^1 : s.».^ ^%- '^•K. ^^y Sin^/ S. C. JAIN s/o Shri bayal Chand Jain, aged about 63 years, retired as Sub-Engineer, r/o b/18 Minocha coiony Biiaspur {C.G.) VERSUS ^' 1. State of Chhattisgarh, Through:- The Secretary, Public Works bepartment, b.K.S. Bhawan, Raipur (C.<$.) •^ 2. Engineer in Chief, Pub!ic Works bepartment [P.W.b.j, State of Chhattisgarh, Tripur Bhawan, Raipur (C.G.) ^ 3. Chief Engineer, Pubiic Works bepartment, ^ ^' [P.W.b.j, Bilaspur circle, Bilaspur (C.&.) 4. The Superintending Engineer, Public Works bepartment, Ciycle.. [P.W.DJ, BilaspurO.ivision,^- Bilaspur (C.G.) 5. 'The Executive Engineer, Public Works Department, [P.W.D.j, Bilaspur Division No.-2, Bilaspur (C.G.) ^"1' 6. The Director, Pension, Accounts and Treasury of the State of Chhattisgarh, Raipur {C.&.} WRIT PETITCON UNbER ARTCCLE 226 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INblA FOR ISSUANCE OF WRIT IN NATURE OF MANbAMUS, CERTIORARI ,PROHABITAIQN,etc. AND / OR FOR ORDER AND / OR DIECTION / DIRECTIONS IN NATURE OF WRIT. ^ETZ:_.__..._ Xi-HC—78 <RT^T ^? f^N' ^T ^^ ^°RI^ ^W^K ^»<n^i '3'ST '::2ff3TRTZr, ^ft^R^, fsjcrii-H^; ^^....w.^..^l2{\zol}0... TS^200 S:fT^T^1^F('^3^:T) ^CT^R^Tran^ Gt.11.2011 ^TRf^T4h 'WToTf ^* fezt T(^gK otT3fRR3:iT^T Shri Vijay K. Deshm4kh, Advocate along with the petitioner Shri Y. S. Thakur, Dy.jA.G. forthe respondents. Shri Manoj Tnurafc, tiie Executi've Shri Englneer/respondent The present petitio j^lo.5 is also present. ri has been fiied by the petitjoner who retlred on 3(p,06.08 from the post of sub- engineer daiming his retira|l dues. it has been informefl by the petitjoner and the Executive Engineer/respoil pendency of this petition tt1 to the petitioner, Learned counsel for admittediy there is an dent no.5 that during the e entire dues have been paid the petitioner submits that nordinate delay in making payment to the petitione|- and under the law he is entitled for the interest on fche retirai dues. Learned counsel app^aring for the state submits that let the petitioner m|ke a representation before respondent No.2 and in tuifn the same would be decided in accordance with law. I 1 s-' i ...,. ^ 1 %ff:rc€9^ S ^. ^y XI-HC—78 ^RT^T's^'felN' ^T ^ST ^IT^ / € HSH^ST^W^ *3^1T '^^TRT^, ^tfrOT^, f^TRTy .. ^^.^'7^30/t^ "^ 200 s^f ^T5?5R- c^^r) ^H^T ^lt^ 3T?^I Accordingiy, the pet respondent No.2 within tw| the eventuality of filing ^ chl^d^l'1 'WI^Tf <f fe^t Tf^gK '^'3tfW3T^T ition is disposed of with a directlon to the petitioner t{3 file a representation before o weeks from today and in ny such representation the same would be decided by the concerned authority in an objective manner with months. As the petjtioner to this Court, he is entjtlejd to the cost of the petition quantifjed at Rs. 3,000. Sd/- Pritinker Diwaker Judge jn a further period of three ^as been compeiled to come