•a<"!i1 1 G-^/o-o IN THE HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WRIT PETITION (S) N0. ^(^u I 2007 -<• PETITIONER ^ :Sukhbati Bai W/o Nawal Verma Aged about 59 years L^^^>' R/o- Village Attaria Bazar, P.O-Kusbhi, ^•" ..- ^;".y Tehsil- Khairagarh, )W^ -•>^<^',^A'" -ff' ">3..' ^... Dist- Rajnandgoan (C.G) Versus RESPONDENTS i*»<iu7cti<1* ^•A ^ r^U>^ ^?^ o' y>- • ^ \Q ots? ^" State of Chhattisgarh Through the Secretary, Public Works Department, D.K.S. Bhawan, Raipur (C.G) Finance Secretary, State of Chhattisgarh D.K.S. Bhawan Raipur (C.G) Sub-Divisional Officer Sub-Division Office C.G PWD, PWD Office, Khairagarh, Dist- Rajnandgoan (C.G) WRIT PETITION UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF 1NDIA FOR ISSUANCE OF A SUITABLE WRIT ORDER OF DIRECTION TO DO JUSTICE IN THE MATTER. DETAILS OF THE PETITION. HiGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR SINGLE BENCH : HON'BLE MR. SATISH K. AGNIHOTRi. J, WRIT PET!TION (S.l N0.980 QFj Petitioner : Sukhbati Bai versus Respondents : State of Chhattisgarh and others Present : Mr. H.S.Ahiuwaiia, counsel for the petitioner. Ms. Deepali Pandey, Pane! Lawyer for the State/respondents. ORDER (Passed on 20i Day of February, 2007) Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that the petitioner, who is working as permanent gangman in the Public Works Department (Building/Road), Khairagarh, seeks a relief that the petitioner, being permanent gangman, be retlred at the age oS 62 years in accordance with the Chhattisgarh Shaskiya Sevak (Adhivarshiki-Ayu) Adhiniyam, 1967 (for short the Act, 1967') read with Fundamental Rule 5S. 2. According to iearned counsei for the petitioner, the oetitioner attained the status of permanent employee, as defined under Rule 2(c) of the Chhattisgarh (Workcharged and Contingency Paid EmDlovees) Pension Ruies. 1979, framed under Article 309 of the Constitution of india. After having attained frie status of the permanent 2 employee, the petittoner would rstire on attainting the age of 62 years on suDerannuaBon underthe Drovisions ofthe Act. 1967. 3. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submite that the case of the petitioner is sauareh/ covered by the decision of this Court passed on 4 January, 2007 in Writ Petition No.108 of 2005 (Gownd vs. State of Chhattisoaiti and others) and other connected matters. 4. Learned counsel appearing for the State/respondents does not dispute the submissions made by iearned counset appearing for the petitioner. 5. The respondents are at liberty to consider the facts of the case as to whether the petitioner has completed 15 years of service as gangman. In ttie event, it is found that the petitioner has compteted 15 years of service, the case shall be governed by the decision of this Court in the matter of Gcwind vs. State of Chhattisgafti and others (supra). 6. Accordingiy, the petitioner, who is permanent gangman, is entitied to retire on attaining the age of 62 years in accordance vnth the provisions ofthe Act, 1967. 7. Thus, the writ petition is allowed. No order as to costs. Sd/- Satish K. Agnihotri Judge Qopal