(^^ C7 IN THEHON'BLEHIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARHAT BILASPURfC.O.^ WRITPETITION (S) N0.' _l PETHIONER Smt. Krishna Mishra, w/o Lt. Shri Ramkrishna Mishra, Through Awadhesh Mishra, Aged about 33. years, R/o Sukulpara, Ppst- Kharod, District Janjgir-Champa (CG). RESPONDENTS sy^ yWi VERSUS 1. State of Chhattisgarh/ Through the Secretary, Department of School Education, DKS Bhawan, Raipur, Ghhattisgarh. 2. Accountant General, Office of Accountanf General, Pagaria Complex, Pandri, Raipur (C.G.) ^"' _. . _ . . / _ ... • :; _ 3. Block Education Officer, Pamgarh, District Janjgir-Champa (CG). .^y....__........^^. bY f^Oy'' WRFT PETITION UNDER ARTICLE 22^227 OF THE ^*y ..• CONSTITUTION OE INDIA ^ •• ia: 0 lliil1 mOH GOURT 0F CHHA'mSGARH AT HLASPUft WRIT PETmONfS) N®.7578 of2010 PETmCMER : Smt. Krishna Midira. VERSUS RESPONDENTS : StateofChhattisgarh&Otheis. WRIT PETmON UNDER ARTICLE 226/227 OF THE eONSTITUTION OFINDIA ^ ;;:1 :"- ::.:----:-1».:»».- SB: Hon'bte ShriSatish K. Asnlhutoi. J. Present: ShriMateenSiddique.Advoeatefwttopetitumer. Shri A.V.Shridiar, Panel Dnsyer ^fhe State^spandeHts, ' OtRDER«»AD (Passed on 03ri day of Januar^ 2011) 1. Leamed counsel appearing for Ifae pctitiotwr suteuts tt»t dhe impugned orda- dated 09.08.2010 (Annexure P/l) has b«nfg raismg a recovery to the tane ofRs, 2,7Z304/- Som ttae petittaner, wilfaout affortfing an opportuuity of hearing and t6 considwtlte case in its entirety, vAennothiagisduefromlfaepetitiQnCTOrfrom her late husband. s 2. Sliri Shridhar, leamed Paael Lawyer aiy^rmg fw the State/respondents submits that the aiatter being related to paimart of retiral benefits, die same may be r^ared ito tfae (»I»IOB committee. 3. This Gourt, m Itoe matter ofW.P. No. 46^/2004 (BayMthMandal v. The State of Chhattisgarh <6 Ortew) aad oflier c<miected inattas, directed the C<»naitteeto eonsider tiie inatter of retaalf as the disputed question of facts were involved. Tte. SMSi ,t3aBgs'»i—-"-"" ^rt@^KSra£ y..^,. "•si ^ fi. 1 ^fflSiIi I "3 // *5^€/' "t'3'~"'T.^"' Committee Was constitoted by the State Govennnert, pursuant to the arder dated 19.06.2006 passed iaW.P. N& 1961^006 <Sm(. KefaBai Chandrakw Vs. State Gavemmsitandofhers^.aaS.satdet dated 13.03^008 passed m M.C.C. Ifo. 105 0^2008 (Stote^ Chhattisgarh & Others v. BaijnathMandal emd OBotba-). '@MS, tUs petition is squarelyeoveted by tiie judgment md wdec dated 31" of January, 2008 passed in W.P.Na 4642/2004 BayveOt Mandal (supra) as sutaiitted by leamed counsel q)pearingfa;1fae parties. 4. Acconliagly, Ihe matter is referred to tiie Pensi<m Coannittee so constituted wilh a direction to consider Ifae case ofthe petilipna- after afiording aa oCTWtunity of hearing to alt flle c<MMaaied parties and pass appropriate wder in aecordance \wfe law, as expeditiously as possible, j»'eferablywitfan a paiod ofsix weeks ihaathedate afreceiptofacopyofthisorder. 5. In the meairtmie, no eoereive steps piirsuant to tiie oider <Ned ).08.2010 (Annexure P/l) diall be taken tifl the CommMteetakes a dedsion,, as aforestated. 6. In view ofthe above, the writ petition is diqmsed of. Sdl-.-S •s^ \^ 3udg« Annt 1 i:F-l