@ HI6H COURT GF CHHATTISéARH AT BILA5PUR W. P.(S) No. 1465 of 2007 Pen‘fioner" Manharun, Aged abom‘ 48 Years, 5/9 Shri Paras Ram working as Gangman, in permanen+ gang, Office of 5.D.O. Pubhc Works Depar?men?, Sub Division Beme‘l‘am, Dis‘r : Durg—(C.G.) R/g Charbhafa, Pas? - Jhal, Tahsi!— Bememra, Dist : burg—(CE) Versus Re$pcn&en?s 51'a1'e 0f Chhaffisgarh Th rough-The Secre‘rary Public Works Department Manfralaya; D.K.5. Bhuwan, Raipur-(C.6.) 2. Engineer«In-Chief, Pubiic Werks Deparfment Near ‘Raj Bhqwan', Disf: Raipur- (C.G.) 3. Suparinfanding Engineer, Public Works Depar'rmem, Raipur Division, Disf : Raipur- (C.6.) 4. Exeau'iive Engineer, Pubiia Works Department Tehsii & Division Beme‘i’am, Dis? : Durgn(C.G.) 5. The 5ub Divisionai Officer, Sub Division Bemefam, TehsilnBeme'i'am, Dis? : Durg-(C.5.) 53: Hmfbie Mr. Jusiiee Sufish K. Agniha‘i‘ni, J Mr. Rakesh Anthonw Advom‘re for The pe‘l’i‘rianer. Ms. Deepali Pandey, Panei Lawyer for Siu'i'e/responden'is; Present ORDER (Passed on mis 14*“ Day of March, 2007) . By fhis pe-Hfion, Iearned counsel appearing far 'H‘Ie pe+i+ioner submi‘fs “Hm? fhe pefi+ionev was emplayed in “the year 1976 in The affice of Public: Work$ Depar'fmen‘f, Tahsil-Beme'mra, D§sfricf— Burg as Gangman and 14w pé'rifianer, who has worked for more 141cm 30 years as Gangman. He $32k$ a rziie‘f +ha+ fha pafi=rion2r being permonanf gangmcm be re'fired of fhe age of 62 year's in aocor'dcmce w§=rh fhe Chha‘i‘fisgarh Shaskiyo Sevak (Adhivnrshiki—Ayu) Adhiniyam, 1967 (for shor+ 'fhe Act 1967‘) read wi'fh Fundamanfa! RuEe (for $hor‘f 'F.R.')56. .' According $0 learnad couase‘ for fhe pa‘ti‘i’ionzr, The pe'l'moner‘ a+m€ned fhe sfo‘rus of permanem emp¥oyee, as dafined under Rule 2(c) of The Chha‘rfisgor‘h (Workchorged arid Con'fingency Pa§d Emp?oyee$) Pemion Ewes, 197’? (for shor'r ‘rha Ruias, 1979‘), framed under Ar'ficle 309 of fhe Consfifufion of India. Affzr haviog affainad The sfufus of fha permananf empfoyee fhe pefifimer would refirz oa affainfing fhe agg of 62 yeard on suparanuuafion under fhe provisions of fhe Acf, 1967. . Learned counse! appearing for fi'le pefifioner would submif fhof fhe case of fhe pefifioner is squareiy oovered by fine decisioo of ‘Pnis Cour-1' pagsed on 4“ January, 2007' in WP. No. 108/2005 (Govird Vs. 5mm of Chhaf‘tisgarh (Sn what‘s) wd efhet‘ connerj’ed mai’i‘ers. we Fespm‘iderrfslsmw <ioe§ noi’ 4. Learned coumzi appaaring few &ispu’m fhz Submissicns made by iaarnad courisei far we paifianer. 5‘ Aécerdim‘y, i412 pe’i‘i‘i’iener, who ig permanzm' gmgman, E5 ami+led 1'0 refire on at‘Mniag The agz cf 62 year‘s in accordance wi't'h fhe AC1: 1967. The pei‘mon is accordingiv aibwed. No arder as t9 cosfs. Sdl— Satish K. Agnihotri Judge { &