HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASF’UR Writ Peiition (S) No. 412 of 2007 Petiu‘oner Smt. Jhuniya Bai Vcxsus Respondents State of Chhattisgarh &. another SB: Hon’ble Mr. Justice Satlsh K. mihotl'i, J Shn' Anoop Majumdar, Advocatt for the petih'oner. Shri Sushil Dubey, Government Advocate for the mspondents. \‘z ORDER (Passed on this 23rd day ofJammty, 2007) l. By this pctiu‘on, the petitioner, who has worked for more than 25 years as Gangman seeks a mlief t}iat the peh'tioner being permanent gangman be retired at the age 6f 62 years in accordance with the Chhattisgarh Shaskiya Sevak (Adhivarshiki-Ayu) Adhiniyam, 1967 ( for short 'the Act, 1967’) read with Fundamental Rule (for short ‘F.R.’) 56. The indisputable facts are that the peu‘h'oner was employed as gangman. According to learned counsel for the petitioner, she attained the status of permanent employee, as defined under Rule 2(c) of the Chhatn‘sgarh (Workcharged and Contingency Paid Employees) Pension Rules, 1979 ( mr short ‘the Rules, 1979’), named under Article 309 of the Constitution of India. Aner having attained the status of the permanent employee the petitioner would retire on attaining the age of 62 years on superannuan’on under the provisions of the Act, 1967. Slni Anoop Majumdar, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would submit that the case of the petin'oner is squarely covered by the decision of this Court passed on @ 4‘11 January, 2007 in W.P. No. 108l2n05 (Govind Vs. 8mm of Chhatfisgarh & others) and other oonnscted mattcrs. Shri Sushil Dubay, lsanled Government Advocata, does not dispute the submissions made by leamcd counsel for the petitioner. Aacordingly, the petiu'oner, who is permanent gangman, is enu‘tled to mtjxe on attaining me age of 62 years in accordance with the Act, 1967. Thc peiiu'on is accoxdingly a110Wed. No cider Satish K. Agnihotri 3 Judge Thalmr W as to costs. [ g Sdl- V v \ \ r