@If‘Ifa’aj/ \ IN THE HIGH COURT OF CHHATTIsGARH AT BILASPUR W.P(g‘No. ‘ l 9 £9 /2oo7 // ETITIONER Jégra Bai, W/o. Late Shri Itwari, W. agsd about $7 ysars, R/o, Near Pani Tanki, Kdudand, Bilaspur District Bilaspur (C.G.) VERSUS State of Chhattisgarh, Through Secrety, Public Works Department, Manalaya, D.K.S. Bhavan, Raipur (C.G.) 1 ngineer in Chief 2: E Public Works Department, Mantralaya D.K.S. Bhawan, Raipur (C.G.) RIT PET / TION NDIA E OF ANY THE P u ar tr W ITION UNDER ARTICLE 2266F THE CONSTITU OF I FOR ISSUANCE OF A WRIT IN THE NATUR MANDAMUS PROHIBITION CERTIORARI ETC. OR OTHER DIRECTION OR ORDER TO DO JUSTICE IN MATTER , » “AW’ @ HIGH COURT OF CHHATTIgARH AT BILAsPUR w. mgsmg. 1196 of zoo? Pe‘tii’ionet‘ : Jagra Bqi Responder!“ : Stow of Chha'rtisgarhl and anofher Versus SB: Ho'n'ble Mr. Jumice sofish K. Agnihah'i. J Present Mr. Sun“ Omani, Advoonfe for 1he pefifioner. Mrs. Anju Ahujn, Depufy Govt Advocwe for 'the state/respondenfs. ORDER (Passed on this 1“ Day of March, 2007) 1. By this pe'm'ion, learned counse‘ ogpearing «for 1he pemioner submits 1ho1' 'I'he pefifioner was employed as 6ongman in 1'he department of Pubhc Worké and the petifioner, who has worked for more fhon 30 years as Gangmon seeks o retief fan? ihe pefifioner being permanen'f gongman be refired of the age of 62 years in accoraance wnh we Chmnisgarh shaskeya 5am (Adhivqrshan- Ayu) Adh‘miyom, 1967 (for short ”the Act, 1967') read with Fundamento! Ruie (for short 'F.R.')56. V Q 2‘ According to learned counsel for the petitioner, the petitioner attained the status of permanent empioyee, as defined under Rule 2(c) of the Chhattisgarh (Workchorged and Contingency Paid Employees) Pension Rules, 1979 (for short 'the Rules, 1979‘), framed under Article 309 of the Constitution of India. After having attained the status of the permanent employee the ,MJw/‘a 6?? pefi‘tioner would refire on affaiming The age of 62 years on superannua'rion under the provisions of 'rhe Act, 1967‘ . Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would submit that the case of +he pefiiioner is squarely covered by fhe decision of fhis Com passed on 4*“ January, 2007 in w.P. Na. 108/2005 (Gama Vs. Sfo‘fe of Chhofl’isgarh & others) and other connected matters. . Learned counsel appearing for The responden‘rs/S'i’o‘te does no1' dispute the submissions made by learned counsel for the petitioner. . Accordingly, the petitioner, who is permanent gangman, is entitled to retire on attaining the age of 62 years in accordance with the Act, 1967. The petition is accordingly aliowed. No order as to costs. p i Sd/— i 3‘ Satish K. Agnihotri " i Judge 5ubhash