,^c"s^ i!S« 'm fcU-<n', ./i^: !y;"fi HIGH CODRT OF CHHATTISOAKH: BILASPUR Writ Petition No. 2S91 of 2004 PeUtloner Respondents Heinlal Sahu, son of Chiatamaui Sahu, aged about 61 years, occupatiou retired Aamin, Department of Water Resources (Irrigation) resident of vfflage - Lailunga, in front of Block Office, Tali. Lailunga, District Rsd^scr (Chhatdsgarh) -Versus- 1. The State of Chhatdsgarh, tfarough : the Secretary, Deparbnent of Water Resources (Irrigation) Dau Kalyaa Singh Bhawaa, Raipur (Chhattisgarh). 2. The Director, fTreasuiy, Accounts and Pension), Raipur (Chliattisgarh). 3. The Joiut Director, (Treasuiy, Account and Pension), BUaspur (C.G.) 4. The Engineer ia Chief, Departm.ent of Water Resources, Raipur (C.G.) 5. The State of MP, througli : Secrctaiy, Departmeut ofWater Resources, VaUabh Bhawan, Bhopal (MP) 6. The Executive Engineer, Departinent of Water Resources, Division Dharamjaigarh, Distt Raigarh (C.G.) 7. The Sub Divisional OflBcer, Department of Water Resources, (trrigation Division) Khamliarpakut, Lailunga, Distt. Ra^arh. (Writ Petition uader Articles 226/227 ofthe Constitutioa oflndia) Single Bencb ; Hon'ble Shri Satteli K. Agtiihotri, J. Shri A. N. Bhakta, Advocate for the petitioner. Shri Yashwaut Singh Tbakur, Deputy Advocate Generat wifh Shri Ajay Dwivedi, Deputy Govt. Advocate for thc State. ORDBR -(Passed on this 10tb day ofFebruary, 2009) 1. With conseat of leamed couasel appearing fbr the parties, fhe inatter is heard finally. 2. This case pertaias to gnevance of non-graat of retiral dues/pension. 3. This Court, ia the maUer of W.P.No.4642/ 2004 (Baijuath Maudal Vs. The State of Chhattitsgarh & ottiers) aud other connected ^^^ '^: ;'ff.A. ~'\ ^''' ^ ^s._j; m!{-^^l.^^-..fi-^-^SM 4. 5. 6. Thakur matters, directed the Committee to consider the matter of retiral dues as the disputed question of facts were iavolved. The Comnuttee was constituted by the State Govenuaent, pursuaat to the order dated 19.06.2006 passed m W.P.No. 1961/2006 (Smt. Keja Bai Chandrakar Vs. Stete Govenuneut of Chhattisgarh and others), aad order dated 13.3.2008 passed in M.C.C. No. 105 of 2008 (State of CUiattisgarh and others Vs. Baijiiath Maadal and auother). Thus, ttus petition is sqiiarely ccwered by the judgment and order dated 31st Jaauaiy, 2008 passed in W.P.No. 4642/2004 (Baijnath Mandal (supra) as submitted by leamed counsel appearing for the parties. This petition is accordiugty disposed ofia the saine terms i.e., the offlce of the Advocate General is directed to send the case to the Coininittec, within a period of 15 days froin the date of receipt of a copy of thls order as well as a copy of the petition from the petitioner. Thereafiter, the Committee shall issue noti.ee to the petitioner aad oflicers concemed withiu a furtlier period of 15 days, The Conunittee shaU consider and pass order, in accordance with law, after affordiag proper opportiurily ofheariag to the petitioner. The petitioner and fhe ofBcers concemed may file additional documents, if necessaiy. The entiae exenase, including payinent of retiral ctues, if aay, to tbe pctitioner, be coinpleted wittun a period of four inonths Iroia the date of receipt ofa copy of ttus order. The petitioner shaU supply one coniplete set of the petition to the State counsel for traasterring the same to the Comnuttee. lu caae of gnevance with regard to non-payment of pensionaiy dues, it is not necessaiy to file a writ petitton before this Court directty. The representation/application can be moved before the Pension Coiamittee, as stated above. The Pension Coaniaittee shalliiot retuse to entertaiu fhe representation/appUcation, if so filed directly. —— - Sd/- satish K. Agnihotri Judge