G^~ \6TS\^- CS) ^. IN_THE HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WRIT PETITION (S) No. L^^3 Of 2010 PETITIONER: RESPONDENTS: ^\. ^^ ^^.<r^-i ^%r ^^^ ^^)7' ^y'^ ^ ^'^- Lr. Smt. Rahi Bai Wd/o Late Shri Jhanau Ram Sahu , aged about 55 years, R/o Karesara, Tahsil Bemetara, District Durg (CG). Versus The State of Chhattisgarh, through the Secretary, I>ublic Works Department, Mantralay at D.K.S. Bhawan, Raipur (CG). The Engineer-in-Chief, Public Works Department, Government of Chhattisgarh, Near Raj Bhawan, Raipur, District Raipur (CG). The Superintending Engineer, Public Works Department, Raipur Division, Raipur, District Raipur (CG). The Executive Engineer, Public Works Department, Tehsil and Division Bemetara, District Durg (CG). The Sub Divisional Officer, Public Works Department, Sub Division Bemetara Tehsil Bemetara, District Durg (CG). WRIT PETITION UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA ^3. 4. 5. 3H^T ^T'RFPF TTSff 3TI^?T'9CTW i<^ Dyy?jl; *n*{di ^»*n^ '3^r r^i^j<ri<Li, ^tflwico, ^i<ni<Hy,< ^.v^^Jl^S^ •^ 200 'BTI^'?! 'T^?)' ( ^tf^^T) FRTOT^f^T 3?T^T SBj Kun'bje Shri Rflanindra Mot Lavv^er 09-08-2010 Shri S.K.Thomas, counsei Ms. Srnita Ghai, Panei Case of the petitioner is permanent Gangman in Pubiic Vv' Jhunau Rarn was reguiarised in P/4). Later on, he died on 21/05/ representation for grant of famiiy Le-arned counsel for the pe to pension In view of the provis Charged and Contingency Paid view of the decision of thls Cou Fvlauhya Pradesh (now C.G.) ueclded on 28/08/2006 and Jh others, CWrit Petition (s) N0.2884 1/02/2010. in view of the submissions it wouid be proper to give ilberiy respondent No.4. On such rep consider the case of the petitionei months from the date of receipt of Vvith the aforesaid observa <=M^[<n<4li 'RTWif ^ fe^l <H»t^i< '^3tRm3TT^?T an3!irivasteva,»|. |or the petitioner. for the State. that her husband, Jhunau Ram joined as <>rks Department in the year 1973. The sald sjervice vide order dated 26/08/08 (Annexure p009. Upon death, the petitioner submitted tension "which has not been reieased. titioner subrnits that the petitioner is entltied |ions contained in fvladhya Pradesh Work ^mpioyees Pension Rules, 1979 as aiso in |r1: in tne case of M.A. Haksrn v. State of s^G others, Cvvrit Petition No.4135 of 2004) i^inia Bal v. State of.Ghhattlsgarh and of 2008 and batoh of petitions) dedded on |made by iearned counsei for the petjtioner, |to the petitioner to make representatlon to Iresenation made, respondent No.4 shaii jn accordance "with ia'w vvithin a period of 4 Irepresentation. tions, the petition js finally uisposed orf. Sd/- Manindra Mohan Shrivastava Judge