. . m THE CHHATTISGARH HIGH COURT OF JUDICAméE AT BILASP’UR ——-—-————-——-f— (C.G.) W‘ PI No — ‘ ia‘rzs w» /2%3 BETwEEN c§\Q§£//// PETITIONER AM DHANI RAM VISHWAKARMA AGE-61 YEARS N OF SHRI BHAROSA VISAKARMA SO HW RETIRD ACCOTA FROM : JANPAD PANCI-IAYAT, DANTEWADA R/o KAILASH NAGAR; DANTEADA TA & DIST. - DANTEWDA (C.G.) STATE F CHHATTI SGARH THROUGH ‘ THE SECRETARY TRIBAL WELFAR DEPAR'HVIENT \D&KwSo BHAWANt RAxPU R. THE DIRECTOR: TRIBAL WELFARE DEPARTMENT PT.R-S.U. CAMPUS CHH'I'‘ISGARH, RAIPUR- . DVISIONAL DEPUTY COMMISSONER TRIBAL DEVELOPMENT, ESTER DIVISION, JGDALPU THE COLLECIOR, TRIL BA DEVEOPMENT: L STRICDANTEWADA (C PETITION UNDER ARTICLE - 226 OF CQ ’STITUTION OF INDIA PARTICULARS OF THE PETITIONER : As abcve in cause title. RARTICU’LARS OF THE RESPONDENTS : As above in cause title. Contd..2... ‘ E UNNT W H‘ A “Mm 0 E r AI I I A AR: DIT- .G.)" / HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR N Writ Petition No. 270 of 2003 Petitioner Ramdhani Ram Vishwakakxma Vexsug Respondents ‘ State. of Chhattisgarh & others Sim R.K. Keshaiwam, Advocate for the petitioner. Shri V.V‘ S. Moorthy, Deputy Advocate General with Shri Sum] Otwani, Panel lawyer for the respondents. ORALORDER { 8tti May 2066) w This order of the Court was passed by Justice Satish K. mihotri. Learned counsel for the petitioner submit that the petitioner has filed this petition seeking following relief:- “7-A- Your lordship may be pleased to quash the punishment order, dt. 10.3.99 vide Annexure P/2 and to regularise the Your lordship may be pleased to pass direction to the Respondents for granting two higher pay scale with consequential benehts of services. C- suspension pen‘od from 21.8.85 to 31.5‘89 with 18% interest p.a. B- Yonfdom‘ship may be pleased to issue a mandamus of l writ/direction or order to the Respondents to settle the pension case of the Petitioner positively. D— Any other relief as may be deemed tit. E~ Cost of petition may be awaided.” With regard to the prayer 7 petitioner submits that the petih'oner is not pressing the prayer to quash » the punishment order dated 10.3.99. With regard to the second part of , —A, learned counsel appearing for the @ the prayer 7-A, learned counsel appeaxing for mt respondents submits on tha basis of the return iilcd by the 1espondents, as under: - “E2. 1t is $ubmitted that the mliefls) that have been sought far by the petitioner thmugh this peetion, regulaxized as can be verifled from the service record] service book of the petitioner. The petitioner has also been granted anears of the difference of wage for the period during which the petitioner was placed under suspension.” With regard to prayer 7—B, it is submitted by learned counsel for the tiled by the respondents that the respondents on the basis of the return the re1ief of regulaxizing the suspension period from 21~8-1985 to 315-1989 has aJIeady been question for granting of the beneflt of time bound higher pay scale (kramonnati pay scale), is under consideration with the appropriate anthoxity. In that event, the respondents are directed to decide the case of the petitioner for grant of time bound higher pay scale (krarnonnati pay scale), Within a period of six weeks; With regard to prayer 7-C settlement of pension case of the petitioner, learned counsel further on the basis of the return tiled by the respondents submits, as under :- “12. Reply to para 5,11: The contents stated in this paragraph are categorically denied. It is further submitted that the petitioner has in this petition suppressed material fact that the period of suspension has already been regularized and the petitioner has also been paid the difference of wage for the period of suspension. 3. pension case of the petitioner is As regards the settlement of the the purpose of pmcessing of his final pension which the petitioner having not done, his pension should not be processed anddecided. it is submitted that if the petitioner fuliills the requirement by filling the 1equisite forms for As regards the payment of pension of the petitioner is concerned it is submitted that the petitioner is being granted provisional pension of 90% of his pension Le, Rs. 27OOI— out of Rs. 3000/-. concerned it is for the petitioner to fill the requisite forms and e'complete all the formalin'es for the granting of full pension the. same shall be processed and fmalized at ths Earliest.” In View of the above stated submissions made by learned counsel for the respondents, on the basis of the return flled b3} the respondents, nothing suIVives in this matter. However, the petitioner is directed to file appropriate applications in the requisite form and complete all the formalities for the purpose of settling his final pension Within a period of one month. Thereafter, the respondents are directed to complete the formalities and settle the pension Within a period of four weeks. For the reasons stated above, the writ petition stands disposed of. No order as to costs. .Rnw / Sd/— ‘ Sau'sh K. Agnihotn‘ Judge ‘11. n