•-.i .<. Us'.; •> SC ?r'SK:^^l^ ^lE^i^t-X'" ^d't^^?^ ^f\y^ IN THE HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WRIT PETITION (S) No. <;53^ /2011 PETITIONER r^.> ^^•^•-' »^€^: .»^'<3} •\ ^*"' RESPONDENTS ^srs^-^ i. Smt. Kunti Bai Yadav, wife of late B.D. Yadav, aged about 61 years, R/o. Near Municipal School, Baikunthpur, District Raigarh (C.G.). VERSUS :1) State of Chhattisgarh, Throuhgh : Secretary, Health Department, D.K.S.Bhawan, Raipur (C.G.) / :2) The Accountant General, State of Chhattisgarh, Raipur (C.G.) :3) ' Chief Medical and Health Officer, Raigarh (C.G.) WRIT PETITION U^DER ARTICLES 226/227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PARTICULARS OF THE PETITIONER As stated above in the Cause Title. 2. PARTICULARS OF THE RESPONDENTS As stated above in the Cause Title. ' 3. PARTICULARS OF THE ORDER AGAINST WHICH ^ THE PETITION IS MADE: SUBJECT MATTER IN BRIEF :- v s 'BBl ^IB^ :]^ ill -iili '^ 1 f:M i!1^1 Siil II ;iEil HiGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH : BILASPUR WRITPETITION (S) N0,538 QF2QJ1 Petitioner Versus ResDondents Smt. Kunti Bai Yadav State of Chhattisoarh & Others (Writ Petition under Article 226/227 ofthe Constitution of India) Single Bench : Hon'ble Shri Prashant Kumar Mishra, J. Present:- Ms. Hamida Siddiqui, Advocate for the petitioner. Shri N.N. Roy, Panel Lawyerforthe State. ORDER(ORAU (Psssed on this 31st dayofJanuary, 2011) 1. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that the case, being payment of retiral benefits matter, may be referred to the pension committee. 2. Shri Roy; learned Panel Lawyer appearing for the State agrees with the submissions made by the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and submits that the request of the petitioner is genuine and proper and the same order may be passed. 3. This Court, in the matter ofW.P. No. 4642/20)4 (Baijnath Mandal v. The State of ChhaWsgarh & Others) and other connected matters, directed the Committee to consider the matter of retiral dues as the disputed question of facts were involved. The Committee was constituted by the State Government, pursuant to the order dated 19.06.2006 passed in W.P. No. 1961/2006 (Smt. Keja Bai Chandrakar v. State Govemment and others) ar\<i order dated 13.03.2008 passed in M.C.C. No. 105 of 2008 (Stete of ChhatSsgarh 8, Others v. Baijnath Mandal andanothei). Thus, this petition is squarely covered by the judgment and order dated 31st of January, 2008 passed in W.P.No. 4642/2004 Baijnath Mandal (supra) as submitted by learned counsel appearing forthe parties. ; 4. This petition is accordingly disposed of in the same terms i.e. the office of the Advocate Generat is directed to send the case to the Committee, within a period of 15 days from the date of receipt of a > copy of the petition Trom the petitioner and this order. Thereafter, iin ^"<><s. ^•-•—*-•;.,. '^ Si iisaiS&i S %i;sy-a§ | J?^f ''^^^' a- 5. 2 the Committee shall issue notice to the petitioner and the officers concemed, within a further period of 15 days. The Committee shall consider and pass order, in accordance with taw, after affordlng proper opportunity of hearing to the petitioner. The petitioner and the officers concerned may file additional documents, if necessary. The entire exercise, including payment of retiral dues, if any, to the petitioner be completed within a period of sw weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. The petitioner shall supply extra copy of the petition to the learned counsel appearing for the respondents for forwardlng the same to the Committee. • ; Sd//- Prashant Kumar Mislira Judge Hil