t^^n IN THE HON'BLE HI6H COURT OF CHHArTESeARH AT BILASPUR 1 '• _: WRIT PETETEON fS) N0.$'! ^ /2011 PETITIONERS /l] Surendra Kumar Supta (Assistant Grade III), S/o. Shri Parmanand 6upta, aged about : 57 years, R/o. Guptapara Arang, Post : Arang, Tdhsil & District: Raipur (C.6.). Bhagwat Prasad Choudhari, (Assistant 6rade III), S/o. Shri Arjun Lal Choudhari, aged about ; 57 years, R/o. Chhataudh, Via : Baikunth, bistrict: Raipur (C.G.). VERSUS RESPONDENTS / ^ 1] State of Chhattisgarh, Through : The Secretary, Department of Water Resources, Mantralaya, b.K.S. Bhawan, Raipur, District : Raipur (C.6.). 2] Engineer-in- Chief, Water Resources, Department, Sihava Bhawan, Civil Line Raipur, District; Raipur (C.G.). 3] The Chief Engineer, Gramin yantriki Seva Vibhag, Vikash Bhawan Civil Line, Raipur, District; Raipur (C.6.). 4] The Chief Engineer, Pradhanmantri (Sramin Sadak Yojna, Civil Line, Raipur, District: Raipur (C.G.). /• / /5] The Development Commissioner, Panchayat <& Gramin bevelopment Department, State of Chhattisgarh, Raipur, District; Raipur (C.G.). WRIT PETITEON UNbER ARTICLE 226/227 OF THE CONSTETUTION OF IN&IA. zr :;^^'^-x' ^ t11Hy(r^*(Tcd "S'SEf '•qrqi^Tq, ®tl1y'|(o,ftwiy^ ..LJ..£.ff.2..^:.£/..t°/.l. sn-^r -qr^ (x^j^d) 3:ii^r'qn'f?;fe •aan 3(1^1 giiirai' 18*1,v'i ^TOT'BfCT sni^i 5.9.2011 Shri P.K. Patel, counsel] Shri Chandresh Shrivaj advance copy. Heard on admission. This petitlon has been account of non-tnclusion of for fhe purposes of grant of b| ndw At the outset, learned that the Govemment has 2005 by which fhe Govemic|ent certain period of service. He covered ~by the new Ctrcula^- petitioners also subiaits 2005 has been issued for fhose cases of emplovee ai fhAt efHq^^ft't ^l+lftf ^ ^k^\ <f^t^K ^Tsifgiian^T .J. for the petitioners. itava, Panel Law^'er for the State, on |filed by the petitioners aggneved on |fhe period of service as daily wage, ^nefit of gratLiity and pension. counsel for the petitioners submits issued Circular dated 2nd March, ent has taken a decision to include subuiits that the petitioners' case is '. SimUarly, leamed counsel for the it anofher Circiilar dated 2nd April, of benefits of gratiiity in respect of priorto31.12.'1988. pp^inted In fhis view of tlie mdtter, respondents may consider fhe claim of fhe petitioners in the Ught of aforesaid two Circulars dated 2nd March, 2005 & 2nd April, 2005. Petitioners may submit fresh representation along with fhe aforesaid two Circulars and •/9 %; I-HC—7S 37I^?r ^il ^fRT •amsn^TgiTijoF MSS Pi'aveaEi 75f '^qTcT^, 'si'tll^lcD, fi<<ni'ytl,< <W<CirwqTc|i W^I ^V (Tpfg^q) TCiW? ^rf5?( sn^r copy of fhis petition, befc respondents. On snch of one monfh from today, decision in fhe matter wifhir cjre repre^entatton the competent authont^ bf the being made, wifhin a period I the competent aufhority shaU take t a period of 3 months fhereafter. With the aforesaid disposed of. ((bservations, the petition is finalty <SI^(^<^ 'STWcff ^f 'feT^ <f^R$TC ^srRman^r Maniiidra Mohan Shrivastava Judge