CK IWf ‘ 3mm 3mm INTHE HIGHK COURT OFCHHA’M‘ISIGARH AT BILASPUR {WRIT PETmoN (S) No. 8 0f 2010 1 ‘ 1 PETITIONER: Smt. Dulgri Bai Goti Wd/o 1 Late Shri ;Ja1 Ram Goti, aged about 60 years, C/o Ku. 1; Sapna Nojnhare, S+q§gin Para Ward N910, Rajnandgaon ‘ (CG). § ; ‘ § Versus _ / ’ . 1 The State. of Chhattlsgarh, ' through the Secretary, Tribal Welfare Department, Mantralay at ‘_D.K.S.x Bhawan, Raipur , (CG). L sPoNDENTs; The ,Aceountant General, Chhattisgarh ,’ Danganiyapara, Raipur (CG). ’ Tribal at . 3. The Commissioner, Department, Bast-ar _ /Jagda1pur (CG); ‘ 4i The Block Education Officer (Tribal) ‘, Block Katekalyan, ' Distriot South Bastar (CG). WRIT PETITION UNDER ARTIctE 226& THE , CONSTITUTION OF INDIA . i E / ' Presenf $hr3 Rakes}: Aathony, counse! fer fhe petmanw Shri PK. Bhaduri Pane! Lawyer far’the State. QR GWH $ ; HEGH CUT G? CHHATTWKR : §BLAP3JR WW: Petiiimq (3} Na. 8 '1 9f 23% 1 . $mi a‘usafi 5%; saw PE?3'§’§§NER ‘ I i gE$Pa¥vDENTs The State 0f Chhattiggafh & $thers §¥w at Peiaimn under Artlcie 228 9f the Gomsiaiuiiw a? indaa} § Varsus Singie Berach 3 Hcn’ble Smi Sa§ish K. Agnihotri: J. 3hr: Kashaf Shakee! stamiiw ccusne} for the respcndem i‘ész §SER $ awed an Ems $ day Feb Jamimia} ; With ihe censent M aeamed caunse!‘f0r the parties, the peii&ion 3$ ‘ h'eawi finaiiv. This case, pefiains $6 grievance 9f {ion-gram uf retiraW dues. teamed cmmsei appeariag for the pet§t§omer, on inseruetien’js, sgbmiis’ mat ihe matter may be {eferred to the“ Pensidn Cemmmee. This $ourt in W P Na 4$£2120M {Baijnath Hiamai Vs‘ ‘fhe Smie 6f Chnaitasgarh 8. others} and other eonnecied maii'ers Liirecieé the ¢ommmee t0 conSider 'the marker of retraai dues as “me disputed question cf facts were mvo ved ‘fhe Sommmee was ceastiimed mi the State Gwemmem pursuqni to me erder eased 19-{3€-2Q$E passed m WPNm1961i2WS §Smt Keja Ban Ghamdiakar ‘vs. Siam Gevemmem e‘fchhaitisgarh arm Othearg}, am} oreier tsaiezi 13-3-2008 passed in max). hie. W50? 2W8 ($i‘aie (3f Cehaiw’tisgaim ami eihei's Vs. Baijnath Manda! aim anci'nef3. ‘i‘hus, ihie @etitimlés squareiy covered by me judgmeni and omer dated 3‘3 3% Jmuaw, 2963 passed in WPNa 4&42f2ei34 §§aijna€§a Mamiai aisupra as submd ed aw ieameci caursea asapearma fos’ the namaa This pemion as accordmglv dispose:d of m the same terng 5e m i wfice of ‘%he itdxmcate Generai is; dgrec‘ted to $end‘the £ase to *ihe Committee, wiihin a pericd of 15 dayS fmm t?§e date ef receipt of a wpy of W5 Omar “Thefea‘fter, ma Ctummittee smaii issue noticeto ti‘e petitione; and of‘icers Lancemed Within a m ther period of 15 days The Cemmmee shall canSIden and pass order In accomance With iaw, after affommg proper apgmiuww a? hearing to me pet§‘tioner. The petitioner amj "‘{he afficers concerned may fiie addmcna§ damuments H mecessary The entire exemise mcludwg eavmem Df retwai dues af any, to tne petmoner be compiekd with”: a pemoci cf fem menthe fram the date a? reeeipt cf a mpy of i§i§s wder. The eetmenei' ehaii supyiy one camplem sei 43f the pekition “3m the State ceunse! as weii as cwnse foe the respmideni N02 fer €rensferying 'Ehe same to the 30mmiitee. l ‘ sd/_ ‘ Satish K. Agnihotri. Judge ) 1