WW»; Slngb'Bench IN THE HON’BLE HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR (c.G.) w.P.(S) No .........SQSa ..... 2011 PETITIONER: 'Smt. Keja Bai Chandrakar, aged 63 years, widow of Late Shri Ram Singh Chandraker, retired assistant teacher, Subhash No. 2 School, Durg, R/o Qr.No.G-1, Old bus stand, Durg ‘ Tahsil and Distt. Durg (C.G.) Versus RESPONDENTS (1) (”The State Govt. of Chhattisgarh Through — The Secretary, Schoo! Education Department, D.K.S. Bhawan, Raipur (C.G.) r1, (2) The Accountant General, State of Chhattisgarh Pagariya Building, Raipur. (3) Block Education Officer, Durg District, Durg (C.G.) Writ petition under Article 226/227 of the Constitution of India for issuance of mandamus of writ/direction or any other appropriate writ. / /, 3Tl%$ 3f! 12313.: Hm was! W'm m B : Hon’ble Shri Manindra Moh S a 30-09-2011 el for the petitioner/s. , Panel Lawyer for the State. for respondent No.2. With the consent of Iearne counse! for the parties, the petition is heard finally. This case pertains to griev nce arising on account of non—grant of retirai dues. Learned counse appearing for the petitioner, on instructions, submits that the ma er may be referred to the High Power Retiral Dues Committee. This Court, in W.P.No.464 2004 (Baijnath Manda! Vs. The State of Chhattisgarh & others) and her connected matters, directed the Committee to consider the ma er of retrial dues as the disputed question of facts were involved. he Committee was constituted by the State Government, pursuant to t e order dated 19-06-2006 passed in W.P.No.1961/2006 (Smt. Keja B i Chandrakar Vs. State Govemment of Chhattisgarh and others), a d order dated 13-3-2008 passed in M.C.C. No.105 of 2008 (State of Chhattisgarh and others Vs. Baljnath v Manda! and another). Thus, th i Z (2; 73%? WW?I?? 'WE'WTFG’7 TEWTFHgi WW?W ................................................._ I 31TH? y: Hm“ - (t—L' \ wgtirdy) nwaf‘wa :1 mmii‘ 4 1im'? {W % 3W—x NW S J. hrivastava man HFH m Shri Somkant Verma, cou Shri Chandresh Shrivasta Shri H.S. Ahluwalia, coun petition is squarely covered by the judgment and order dated 315‘ January, 2008 passed in W.P.No.4642/2004 (Baijnath Ma dal (supra) as submitted by learned counsel appearing for the parties. n v s i l 23 WWWWI wFCQm m% 00 mm (maxu) WWW¢§$W manufmsnaw “Q, ‘$31,?“ anw \ WW Wmw mmm Deepti This petition is accordingly diépésed of in the samé terms i.e., the office of the Advocate General is directed to send the case to the Committee, within a period of 15 days from the date of receipt of copy mmittee shaii issue notice to the hin a further period of 15 days. The 'com'mittvée‘shallconsider and pas order in accordance with law after affording proper opportunity of he ring to the petitioner The petitioner and the offcers concerned may fi additionai documents If necessary The entire exerCise, including pa ment of retiral dues, if any, to the petitioner, be completed within a p riod of four months from the date of receipt of copy of this order. The petitioner shall supply o e complete set of the petition to the State counsel as well as coun el for the Accountant General for transferring the same to the Com ‘ttee m ’ sai— Mohan Shnvastava Man'mdra / / 3’ t" WWW: Iiamrrd—is/Mo—uvo i 150,000 i 't ’ Vi