•^ >-.. ^f' ^" ^ (^ mGH COURT OF GHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR Writ Petition (S) No. 673 of2008 PETITIONER : Bharat Singh Bisen S/o Shri Chandra Shekhar Sin^i, aged about 59 years, Retired Assistant Chief Supervisor, Jila Sahakari Kendriya Bank Maiyadit, Resident at Azad Chowk, Pendra, District Bilaspur (CG). VERSUS , ~ RESPONDENTS : 1. State of Chhatfegarii, Throug^i: The Secretary, Departinent of Cooperative Societies, -DKS Bhawan, Mairtrayala, Raipur(CG). 2. The Registrar, Cooperative Societies, State of Chhattisgarii,Raipur 492001 (CG). 3. The Chief Executive QfSeer, Jila Sahakari Kendriya Bank Maryadit, Bilaspur (CG). (WMT PETmON UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF THE CONSTmjHON OF INDIA) fSB: Hon'hle Mr. Sattsh K. Asnilwtri. J.) Present : ShriDhirendraMishra,AdvocateforthepetttiQner. Shri Satish Gupta, Govt .Advpcate forthe State. ORALOBDER (Passed oft 01* ofFebruary, 2008) ^ (1) By this petition, the petitioner, wfco has retired fi'om service on 30.11.2006, is claiming retiral benefits. (2) Leamed counsel appearing for tfae petitioner submit that on 19.06.2006 m W.P. No. 1961/2006 (Smt. Keja Bai Ghandrakar Vs. State Govemment of Chhattisgarii and others), Ihis Court passed the following order: ".....Intum, the A.G. OiEce is gettiag incortect informatiou and not able to give aufhority letter at the time ofretu-ement ofan employee, therefore, a committee consistirig offoUowing ofBceis is constituted: ^- '.. • • . . • • (1) Speeial Secretary (FinMice), (Chainnan), (2) Any ofBcer of the rank of Additional Secretary of Law Department, (Member), (3) Direetor, Treasury, Accounts and Pension, (Meniber), (4) Deputy Accountant General (Furids), (Member), (5) Joint Seeretary (General Administration Department, State of Chhattisgarh), (Member cum Secretary)" ' - , ;, ._ij'^ /.1-^ i:-^^^^^^^^^ (3) Leamed counsel appearing for the respondents subnrit tiiat pureuaut to the above order a Gommittee, eonsisting oftiie above-stated officers has been constituted to look into tiie grievances ofthe retired employees, in respect ofretiral du . (4) Leamed counsel appearing for the State farther submit that Ifae said Connnittee is in existence and all tiie disputes, raised by the petitioner in this petition, may be deeided by the said hi^i power Committee, within prescribed time. (5) In tiiis petition, tfae disputed question offacts wilh regard to fhe retiral dues (supra) are involved, which caianot be deeided by (his Court, as the disputed questions of facts can be resolved by the hi^i power committee (supra)in consultation wifli fh®retired employee andthe coneemed officers. Tlius, I am ofthe considered opinion that it would be just and expedient to direct the above Committee, so constituted, to look itrto the disputes and pass appropriate orders, inaccprdaacewhh law. (6) Aceordu%ly,the offiee ofthe Advocate Generalis directed to send fhe case to the Comauttee, within a period of 15 days finm the date of receipt of a copy of this order. Thereafter, the Ccanmittee shall issue noitice to the aggrieved retired employee and flie officers coacemed, within a fiulher period of 15 days. TTie Committee shall consider and pass order, iii accordance with law, after afFordiag propw opportiiaity of hearing to the 'eniployee. The employee concemed and tiie officeis ccncemed may file additional documents, ifaeeessary. The entire exercise, including payment ofretiral dues (supra), ifany, to the petitioner, be conipleted wilfain a period offour mcuiths ftom the date ofreceipt of a cq»yofthis order.. (7) In view offhe foregoin^ the petition is disposedof. No order asto costs. Sd/- Satish K. Agnihotri Judge