b »^~' c^ i IN THE HON'BLE HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR W.P.fSl. No. /2011 PETITIONER RESPONDENTS V^.f ^^ ^^lv }. '{• i^-fal Smt. Umadevi, aged about 63 years, Wd/o Late Ram Lal Swarnkar, R/o Village .t- Bandhap^ali, Post Navapara, Distt. Raigarh (C.G.) VERSUS :1. Stateof Chhatfisgarh Through : The Secretary Tribal Welfare Department, D.K.S. Bhawan Raipur (C.G.) Joint Director Treasury, Account & Pension, Raipur, District-Raipur (C.G.) District Education Officer, Raigarh, District-Raigarh (C.G.) Block Education officer,T.W.BIock 2. 3. 4. Kharsia, Distt. Raigarh (C.G.) WRIT PETITION UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA. 1. PARTICULARS OF THE PETITIONER :- As Stated above in cause title. 2. PARTICULARS OF THE RESPONDENTS :- ^.€,A As Stated above in the title clause. ^ ®y^^f ORDER AGAINST WHICH WITH PETITION IS i'€i^Sy' ^"''^y MADC:- .•^•'^ ^'' •'\^-f' '-.^-i-' wsai 311^1-^; f'd.-u^ an&^i sftHi^ ^Tf^T 2-0 TSE[ ^i^iid'1), 'STftwis, r«itni'Mi,< wwirwii* .lv....P^......6.L/ ra?' 200 sn^iwiwdfw SB : Hon'ble Shri Manindk-a Mohan Shrivastava, J. 10.01.2011 Mr. K.K. Pandey, couns] Ms. Sunita Jain, Panel This Court, in W.P.No.' The State of Chhattisgarh matters, directed the Comm retrial dues as the disputed pursuant to fhe order d W.P.No. 1961/2006 (Smt. Ke <!hl^fcl'Ifl-f qwcif'9 fe^t <(°ltSl< '^3if:OTan^r •l for the petitioner. ,awyer for the State. With the consent of lea^-ned counsel for the parties, the petition is heard finally. This case pertains to ^rievance of non-grant of retiral dues. Learned counsel appea| the matter may be referred to ring for the parties submit that the Pension Committee. 1-642/2004 {Baijnath Mandal Vs. js otkers) and other connected tttee to consider the naatter of l^uestion of facts were involved. The Committee was constiti^ted by the State Government, |ated 19-06-2006 passed in }/a Bai Chandrakar Vs. State Govemment of Chhattisgarh ^.nd othersj, and order dated 13-3-2008 passed in M.C^C. No. 105 of 2008 (State of Chhattisgarh and others Vs. i^Baijnath Mandal and another). Thus, this petition is squarely covered by the judgraent and order dated 31st January, 20Q8 passed in W.P.No.4642/2004 t^ - t Si -'' iXKHC-22 ^\ 75T "Lll'i|l<'l'il, ®flly'16,(«l<'ll«y tlTqwr gitllcli 200 f^B^ST' sn^r^i R-ti*. 3TI^( ^HPti ^IISfl 311^1 TRji^re •gfta -I- [(Baijnath Mandal (supra)] a appearing for the parties. 3 submitted by learned counsel This petition is accorc^ingly disposed of in the same terms i.e., the ofGce of fhe \ send the case to the Com.mil 'Ydvocate General is directed to ;tee, within a period of 15 days Committee shall issue notic affording proper opportunity petitioner and the officers documents, if necessary. 1 payment of retiral dues, conipleted wlfhin a period oJ ^)i<[ifef<fl^ Hi^^'^ is^ <r<»R^r< '^3lfTOT 311^1 from the date of receipt of a cJ3py of fhis order. Thereafter, the to the petitioner and officers concerned within a further p^riod of 15 days. The Committee shall consider and pass orde|r, in accordance wifh law, after ^)f hearing to the petitioner. The concerned may file additional [he entire exercise, including [f any, to the petitioner, be four months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order, The petitioner shaU s^-ipply one complete set of the petition to the State couns^l as well as counsel for the Accountant General for tijansferring the same to the Committee. Sd/- MaitiBdraMoiiariShrivastava Judge Praveen liffli [W Hl