f IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BILASPUR CHHATTISGARH‘ SINGIE BEWW WRIT PETITION Ng ‘« OF 006 1U? Baram §ifigh Thakur, S/o Late Shri Jagmohan ’Singh ’Thakur, Aged about 68 years, retired Head Clerk, K C.M.D. College, Bilaspur, R/o 108, Ms? ew " Bajpayee Tower, Idgah Road, Masanganj;éBilaspur (Chhattisgarh) PETITIONER : o“ w“ x RESPONDENTS : State of Chhattisgarh Through . the Secretary, { Departmerit of Higher Education, D.K.S. Building, Mantralaya, Raipur, Chhattisgarh. The Commissioner, Department of Higher Education, Government Science College Premises, Raipur (Chh'attisgarh) Dlrector Department of Higher Education State of Chhattlsgarh Ralpur (Chhattisgarh) ‘The Joint Director (Finance), Department of Higher Education, State of Chhattisgarh, Raipur (Chhattisgarh) The Principal, C.M.D. College, .w" Bilaspur (Chhattisgarh) Versus WRIT PETITION UNDER ARTICLE 226/227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA XI-HC—22 mm WW W%“n 1/ 13-?-2006 Shri BD. Guru, ccun3el for the petitioner. Shri Satish Gupta, Depuiy Govt. Advocate for the State/ respondents NM to 4, on advance opy. Heard both the counset, The main grievance faised y the petitioner in thie writ petttion is that after his retirement on 1.11 .98, pension vide order Annexute-Pg't was sanctioned in whieh it was mentien d that weft 1.4198 the petitioner wiil be entitieci for pension of Rs.936/—, hie pension has been commuted and- on account of that the petitioner wilt get R31 8‘008/-. After commuting the pension, the petitioner was authoti ed to draw Rs,624/- as pension and remaining R531 2!- was deducted from the pemion against commuting the pension. The commutation pa ment order AnnexureP/Z was passed by the Deputy Director (Finance), igher Education, $tate of Chhattisgarh whereae, the petitioner was never aid commuted pension of Rs.18,008/-, and even then he is getting iess pension of Rs.312/- per month ;sinoe 1.1.98. Learned counsel for the p tjtioner submittedrthat the petitioner made several representations bu the respondents authorities are not passing any order. Counset forth r submitted that in the circumstances, the petitioner may he aiioweci t make a detailed representation to respondent No.4 bringing out the istake to the notice of respondent No.4 and he be directed to pass approp iate order to which iearned counsel for respondents has no objection. Having heard teamed ooum el for the parties, having regard to the facts end circumstances of‘the ca e and without expressing any opinion on the merit of the case, the pe itioner is aiiowed to make a detaiied l l [new l l Ban/3 representatmn aiong with copy of this petition t0 respondent No.4 within a periodof 10 days from today and ir turn. respondent No.4 i$ directed to deoide representation of the petition 3r within a period of 3Q days from the ‘ date of receipt of representation, 0i its own merits, after examining the points raised by the petitioner and ass appropriate order, in acoordance with law. Withzthe direction aforesaid, t e petition stands dtsposed of. , Consequentiy, M.(W.)P. No. 62o/2006 and i.A.No.6738/2006 atso stand disposed of. Parties are entitied for oertifie copy of this order. Sd/- L.C. Bhadoo i? : /\ 4v yéa g; (00 \ a“ \ New XLHc-22 arm m WW I .G“ ’ W 20a} mam mmm . m “0?.“ 35mm WET 13?wW % Wm