ITION(S) No. •ETITIONER Sushil Chandra Singh S/o Shri R.S.Singh, aged about 63 vears, Rt. Lecturer, R/o Vill & P. Ta'kela, Teh and Distt Raiearh (C.G.) ^7ERSVS 1. State of ChAattissarh Througli - Seeretary EducationaS Department D.K.S. Bhawan, Raipur (C.G.) 2. Director, Public Education, StateofC.G., Raipur. 3. Distt Education Officer State of ClAattisearfa Raigai-h(C.G.) 4. Principal, Govt. Higher Sec. School Vill - Kotara, Teh & Distt Raigarh (C.G.) WRIT PETmON L7NDER ARTICLE 226 OF THE CONSTITOTION OF INDIA SB: Hon'ble Shri Sattoli K. ABirihotri. J. Present: Shri Uttam Pandey, Advocate tbr the petitioaer. Slm U.N.S.Deo, Goverament Advocate forthe State/respondents. 2. (Passed on 01st day of Febriiary, 2008) Bv this oetitiori. the petitioner, who has retired from service cm 31.05.2006. is claiming his retiral bssnefits with interest. Uamed counsel appearmg for fhe petitioner submits that on 19.06.2006 in W.P. No. 1961/2006 (Smt. Keja Bai Chandrakar Vs. State Govemment and others), this Court passed the following order: ".... intum, the A.G. ofBce is getting incorrect infoiTttatioa aad aot abie to eive aufhority letter at tlie time ofretirement ofan employee, therefore, a committee consisting offollowing officers is constituted: (1) Special Secretary (Finance), (Chaimian), (2) Asy officer of the rank of Additional Secretary of Law Depai-unent, (Metiiber), (3) Director, Treasury, Accounts and Pension, (Member) (4) Deputy Accountant General (Funds), (Member), i'5'iJoint Secretan? fGeneral Administration Department, itate ofCMiattisgarh), (Member cum Secretan')" Leamed counsel appearing for Ae State/respondents submits that Dursuant to the above order a Committee, consistmg ofthe above-stated oificere has beeri constituted to look into the grievances of the retired emplovees. in respect ofretiral dues. !tfii MS — •I i^^^i^ a ^ SiSSafcf^*.'^'') 4. Leamed couusel appsaring for the State/respondents fiirfher submits that the said Comimttee is in existence and all the disputes, raised by the petitioner in this petition, may be decided by the said High Power Cotamittee, within prescribed time. 5. In this pstitioii, the disputed question of facts with regard to retira! dues are involved wfaich cannot be decided by this Court, as the disputed questions of fact can be resolved by fhe High Power Committee (supra) in consultation with the retired employee shd fhe concemed offieers. Thus, I am oflhe considered opmion that it would bejust and expedient to direct fhe above Committee, so coastituted, to look into the dispute and pass appropriate orders, in accordance with law. 6. Accordinsjv, tfae ofiice ofthe Advocate Oeaera} is directed to send the ease to fhe Committee, within a period of 15 days from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. Tliereafter, the Conmiittes shall issiie aotics to the aggrieved retired eniployee and the ofHcers concemed, within a fiirfher period of 15 days. The Committee shall consider and pass order, in accordance with law, after affording proper opportunity of hearmg to fhe employee concemed. The employee coacemed and the ofBcers concemed may file additional documents, if aeeessary. The eatire exercise, includmg pa^inent of retiral dues, if any, to the petitioner be completed within a period offour months from the date of receipt ofa copy ofthis order. 7. In view oftlie foregoing, the petitioa is disposed of. No order asto costs. 1 Sd/- Satish K. Agnihotri Judge ^T'H