51f IN TiiE HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISG^H .AT BIL^SPUR. WRIT PETITION NO.^^)^=S~OF 2005. PETITIONER ^.--^^^ .^ ^\.--'()€^"^ •...*"" ^M.^^ .-..••" ,.,'^^>- €^y ^"'Oy ^^•' VSP^SUS Shanti Lal Patel, Son of S-ci Jagdish Prasad^ aged aboufc 26 years^ resident of village: Dongakohroud^ Police Station s Pomgarh, Tehsil s Pangarh^ District $ Janjgir - Champa ( C.G, ) RESPONDENTS ^ i^<,^ '^^::^ ^.f <^'~i<> _.^,^°^';)-' M^^l? 1 ^^^K ^.^^ j ^n>' •^. 'K^-^/ "•- -.^^ ..^' 1» Union of India through the Secrefcary, Ministry of defence^ New Delhi^ /2^ 22 Grenadiers^ Charlie Company fchrough its Managing Direcfcor^ Ministry of Defence^ New D^lhi» '-3^ The Directo-r General of Infantry / Inf-6 ( iters ) GenerQl Sfcaff ©ranch^ Anny He^dquarter^ 435-A Wing Sena Bhawan^ Nev; Delhi^ The CommQnding Officer^ Grenadiers^ Sbst Bag No. 17, Jabalpur ( M*^ ) .5» State of Chhatfcisgarh through the Secretary^ Social Welfare Department^ D^K.S^ Bhawan, Raipur<» ^ 6» The Direcfcor, Sainik Kalyan , Near Collecfco- rafce^ • Raipus: ( C*G ) ^ 7, The Collecfcor, Janjfir, Disfct : Janjgir - Champa ( C.G. ) ^' ^IT_iETlTION UNDER_ART:LCL£S_22^6/2J^O^^ffi^O^&JJJ^I^ Off INDIA POR ISSUMCE OF WRIT, DI£1ECTION IN_T _NATURE,. OF M.ANDJUWS ..« ..< .,«_ETC.. . ..2/-. HJGH CQURT OFCHHATTISGARH : BILASPUR. PETmONER RESPONDENTS WRIT PETiTION NQ. 5925 OF 2005 Shanti Lal Patel Versus Union of India & Others (Writ petition under Articie 226/227 of th®Constitution of India) Singie Bench : Hors'ble Shri Satish K. Agnihotri, J. Present:- Shri V.K. Pandey, coynseS for the petitioner. Ms Fouzia yirza, Assistani Soljcitor General for the Unlon of Indla. ?v1s Sunita Jaln, Panei Lawyer for the State. ORDER (ORAU (Passed on this 15th day of September, 2009) 't . Wlth the consent of learned counsel appearing for the parties, the Detltion is heard finallv. The petitioner, by this petition, seeks compensatlon .wjthln the stipuiated period, further payment of semce benefte e.g. insurarsce, Pension, ete. and a direction to provide any other jofa for the iiveiihood of the petitioner, Leamed counsei appearing for the petitioner submlts that the petltioner was engaged on reguter basis as Porter by the respondent-authoritiea. On the contrary, iearnecl counsei appearing for the Unlon of Sndia/ respondents No.1 to 4 submits that the petltloner was engaged as casual Porter for a period of 3 days i.e. for the period from 28-9-2000 to 30-9-2000, as is evident from the muster roll (Annexure - R/1). The petltioner ciaims severai reliefs without producing relevant documents in support of hls contention that he vvas employed on the post of Porter on reguiar basis. On query, asto whether under any statutory provislons, executive instructions, clrcuiars, ete. he is entitled to compensation and other ser^ice beneflte, as claimed by iimi^ the petitioner, tearned counsei submits that the petitioner is not In possession of any document to estabiish his daim. it is well settled princjpie of law that it Is for the petjtioner to proye the averments made in the pieadings. According to the iearned counsel for the respondents since the petitioner was empioyed for a period of 3 days casuaiiy as Porter, the petltioner Is not entitled for any compensation for the Injuries, If any, sustained by hJm during the period and the petitioner is not further entitied to servlce benefifcs, as ciaimed byhim. Having heard learned counsel for the partles, perused the pleadings and the documents appended thereto, it is not posslbie to record any finding in favour of the petitioner for want of relevant materials. Thus, the averment made In the return filed by the respondents No.1 to 4 has to be accepted, as the same Is supported by Muster RolS aiso. Tnls CouE't cannot grant any relief de hors statutory provislons and in the present case no document has been produced by the petitjoner In support of his c!aim. For the reasons mentioned hereinabove, the tvvrit petitlon is llable to be and is hereby dismissed for want of relevant materiais, No order asto costs. Gowri Sd/- Satish K. Agnihotri Judge