Singls Bench .<-, i.--f /^ F-' [-^ol-— W THE KIGH COUKT OF JUDICATURE OP CHHATTISGAKH AT BIIASWR WRm^TmON N0. ^-~1! /06 aj WRTf reTUION UNDERARTCLE 226/227 OF TME CONSTITU'nON OF INDIA PETITIONER -^pv^ Shri Ram Pse^ Ram, son o£Sbri Muneshwar Ram aged ab&ut 62 .-••'"^? years, occupatioa Retired OfSce . ^"'. ^ ^•^^' {%.- •A" !>' ••••>.-B;.^ ..•'' ,*•* ^•^^•^ ^••''^K;'^--'' -•"y^^ ^' RESPONDBNTS S.O^ Snpecntendent R/o. NaBiaaleaIa, Near Polytechnic college, Ambflsapur, Surguja (C.Q.) VERSUS I. State of Chhattisgarh, ^ tihrougb the Secretary, Dep^rtaxeot of Tribal Weifei-e, Dau Kalyaa Sin^i Bbawan, Manlralay, Raipur (C.G.) 2. Collector. DistL Surguja (00.) 3. The C2aef Execi.itme Officer,, Janpad Panchayat Mainpat, Surguja (C.G4 XI-HC-78 WH^II ShHlcb 3ST "Ml<<ld<l, ^Tn<d'l6, Rtftl'y; .^.•^.^y.i! ^ 3TT^?Tq?R? (^q(j,si<,<T) sn^r^ l<-fi+ gs(T3TR^TshHiqi CTdTW HfN 3T)^T <wifepftT wrat'if te^t <f^KT!: ^srf^TTsn^r 28-8-2006 Mr. Rckesh Kumar Jhc, coun^< AAr. Sumesh Bajcy, Sovt. Adt)< on advance copy. Heard both the counsel. By this writ petition under A ths petitioner has prayed for qua^l 2004 (Annexure P-1) ond further amount. The case of the petitioner is| Superintendent in the Office of Annsxure P-1, recovery of Rs.44,2; which the petitioner represented ti Executive Officer, Janpad Panchay|it 2005 (Annexure P-7), whereby the] that the petitioner is not iiable for] frora him, even then, the recovery the final payment of the 6PF is ni pstitioner has not made representcr^ in view of the order dated 19-5-; effected from the petitioner. In the circunsstances, learm the petitioner may be oilowed to mai el for the patitioner. acate for the State/r-espondents No.l & 2, •ticie 226/227 of the Constitution of Indio, hment of the reeovery order dated 8-11- lirectin9 the respondents to pay the 6PF that he retired in the year 2004 as Office espondent No.2. Thereafter, vide order 'O/- was ordered ogainst the pstitioner on the authorities and on enquiry, the Chief •: AAoinpat passed the order dated 19-5- oetitioner was exonerated and it was heid any loss and no recovery can be effected (s bein9 effected from the petltioner and ^t bein9 made to the petitioner. But the \\on to respondent No.2 to the effect that p05, recovery of Rs.44,220/- cannot be ^ counse! for the pet'rtsoner submits that )e a representation to respondent No.2 and P.T.O. XI-HC-78 TEET -i<l'41Cl'i|, »Tnti'16,fsf!ll<H^< +11^MI sh*lich w:y..^2il.^^ 311^1 4ach (l^t^^) sn^TqirR-fitti gqr3ii^T.gii''-rt -°"- Soma STdTW: tlf?(T 3TI^T •^ respondent No.2 be directed to d|i cppsaring for the State/rssponden1(: Havin9 heard learned counse] and cir'cumstances of the case emd patitioner is aliowed to make a rep grievance that in view of the ord) Executive Officer the petitioner Rs.44,220/-, annexing a copy of fifteen days from today and in tur^ representction within one month fr^ the documents and points raised b^) accordonce with ]aw. If as per th^ heid to be not iiabie for paymen^ payment of the 6PF of the petiti( Accountant 6eneral and in turn, th( pass order for final payment of @P\ authority. With the directions aforesai< Consequently, M.(W.)P.No.; Partiss are entitled for certi^ <t)l<<I<1''fl-l lltfdT ^' fe^t' rfSfRR ^sTf^iran^r scide the same, to which iearned counsel (s No.l & 2 has no objection. for the parties, havin9 regard to the facts tiavina perused the record of the case, the •esentation to respondent No.2 raising his sr dated 19-5-2005 passed by the Chief |is not Jiabie for making any payment of ^ne writ petition and its annexures within respondent No.2 is directed to decide the \m the dcte of its receipt after considsring the petitioner, in an objective manner,in order dotsd 19-5-2005, the petitioner is of Rs.44,220/-, then the case of final rtbner be forwarded to the Office of the He Offics of the Accountant General shal! 'p considering the report of the concer-ned , the petition stands disposed of. also stands disposed of. ied copy of this order. 34t>6/2(X)6 L.C-BKadoo Jddge P.T.O.