^, \ •C-<J L HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH. BUASPOR W.P. ISl No. 7241 of aK)07 PBTITIONBR RESPOMDBWTS Phul Kuuwar, D/o Shri Ookul, aged about 57 yeara, R/o ViU^e and Post Chaitma, Tahsil Pali, District Korba {C.Q.) Versus State of Clihattisgarli. Tbtwiytt Secretaxy, Public Worfes Departmcnt, Mantralaya, DKS Bhawan, Raipur (C.G). Sub-Divisioiial Officer, Sub Divisional No.l, Public Works Department (P.W.D) Katghora, Distt. Korba (C.G). WEgTPBTITIONimDBRjytTtCUE;5260FTS@CG^^ OPINDIA Appearance; Shri Vinod Tekani, Counsel for fhe petftioner. Shri Ajay Dwivedi, Paacl Lawyer for the State. ORALORDBR (07.12.20071 SUIUL KUMAR SIWHA. J. Heard. Leamed counsel for the petitioaer submits tUat a pennanent Gang-inan is to be retired at fhe age of 62 yeais in act»rdaacewtth the Chhattisgarh Shaskiya Sevak (A^tivarshiki-Ayu) Adhirdyam 1967tead wifh Fundamental Riiles, 56. He afao subinits that fhe point raised has bcen decided by this Court in batch ofaiatters i.e. W.P. No. 108/2005 aad inany other conaected niatteis on 04.01.2007, reported in 2007 {Stt C.QJj^f. 39 IGwolnA & OUwrs vs. State efC.G. t«ndother^l and fhis matter is squarety covered by that decision, which may be disposcd ofon the same terms. Leamed counsel for ffae State fairly ^grees that this inatter is covered by the said decision. Howevcr, he submits Ihat m somc inatters the State has .fited writ appeals. Unless sonie interim order is passed, xaerefy on acconnt of filing of the writ appeal, hearmg of thls writ petiticm cannot be fcept \ W.P. (S)No.724lQW7 Shyna in abeyance, when tfae niatter is squaa^ly covered by fhc said judgment. In the result, thss petition is allowed. It is disposed of in tenas of the otder dated 04.01.2007 passed ia W.P. No. 108/2005 and oQier connected matters. No order as to cost. | c^; i SsfnilICumaESiriha JliSge | JA'' J