•&1 "® •^ IN THE HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WRIT PETITION (S) N0. ^5 / 2007 PETITIONER 1\\' l;; .'^- V ^..•'(^^0 c"> Smt Krishna Bai, W/o. Dukalu Lodhi, Aged about 59 years, R/o. Koni, Bilaspur, Tahsil & District BUaspur (C.G.) ^.^ ., 'f' A.--'' y' VERSUS RESPONDENTS .-1. State of Chhattisgarh, Through the Principal Secretaiy, Department of Public Works, Mantralaya, D.K.S Bhawan Raipur (C.G.). The Superintending Engineer, Department of Public Works, Bilaspur Division, Bilaspur (C.G.) The Sub Divisional Officer, Public Works Department, Sub Division 1,2853 Bilaspur (C.G.) WRIT PETITION UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA FOR ORDER/DIRECTION IN NATURE OF WRITS OFL^IANDAMUS, CERTIORARY OR ANY OTHER WRIT OR LIKE NATURE kwA \%'he Petitioners most humbly beg to submit as under :- fc^?*ij 11'' ra.'t*':,^''' ^' C—s- @ HI6H COURT OF CHHATTIS&iUtH AT BILASPUR W. P.fSlNo 925 of 2007 PetitKmer &nt. Krishna Bai Versus Respondents : Sterte of Chhattisgarh c»id(rthcrs 58: Hon'bfe Mr. Justfce SaKrii K. AgiAotri. J ^- Present: Mr. Adtwk Soni, Advocate for Ihe petitioner. Ms. Deepali Pandey, Panel Lawyer for the State/respondents. ORDER O'assed on this 19tfl &oy of Febniwy, 2007) 1. By Ihis petition, leamed counsel appearing for •the petitiwier submits •that •the petitioner was CTiployed on 1.U974 cs Work charged emptoyee and the petittoner, who has worked for nwre Ihon 30 years as fiangnwn Seeks a nslief that the petitioner beirg pennanent gta^man be retired at the agt of 62 years in acccrdance wi-th the Chtwttisgarh 9icd<iya Sevalt (Adhivarahiki-Ayu) Adhmiyam. 1967 (for ahort 'the Act, 1967') rcad wth Fundamental Rule(forshort'F.R.'^6. 2. Accordng to lenmed counael for the petitiwwr, 1he petitioner (rt-tained the stalus of permonent emplayee, as dBfmed under Rule 2(c) of -the Oihattisgarh (Workcharged ond Contiigency Paid Employees) Pension Rules, 1979 (for short '-the Rutes, 1979'), fromed under Article 309 of -the Cwisti'tution of Indiu. After hamng attained the status of Ihe perinenent employe the petitiwier wouU rctire on attamting 1+ie age of 62 yean on supenimiuation taider the proviskms of the Aet, 1967. 3. Leamed counsel oppearng for the petitioner would submits Ihat the case of the petitioner is squapely cowred by •ttie decision of Ihis Cowt pasaed on 4* January, 2007 in W.P. No. 108/2005 (Sovind Vs. State of ChhcM-isgarh & ottens) and other comected matters. 4. Leamed couruel appearing for •tfae rwpondents/Storte does not dispute the submissions made by kamed counsel for Ihe petitKmer. 5. The respondents are at liberty to consider -the facts of Ihe case asto whether the petitioners hwe completwl 15 yars of serwce as gangman. In Kie event, it is found that -rtiey have completed 15 years of service, the case shall be govemed by 1+w decision of this Court in Govmd Vs. Storte of Chhattisgarh ond others (supro). 6. Accordingly, the petitioner, iriw is permanent ganyiwn, KS entitled to retire <wi attaining the cge of 62 years in acoordanw Wrth the Act, 1967. The petition is accordmgjy allowed. No orater as *o costs. Sd/- Satish K. Agnihotri Judge SiAbosh