SINGLE BENCH 6%lw IN THE HON’BLE HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WRIT PETITION (S) NO. 9}}g 2011 PETITIONER : f' Ram Dutt Dubey, S/o. Late Shri Janardan Dubey, Aged about 61 years, Retired as Time Keeper from the office of Executive Engineer, Water- ResourCes Department, Barnai Canal Sub Division, Ambikapur, R/o. Village Rajapur, Post — Sakholi, District—Surguja (C.G.) Versus i. State of Chhattisgarh, through the Secretary, Govt. of Chhattisgarh, Department of Water Resources, D.K.S. Bhawan, Mantralaya, Raipur (C.G.) . The Engineer—in—Chief, Water Resources Department, Raipur (C.G.) . The Chief Engineer, Water Resources Department, Bilaspur (C.G.) . The Executive Engineer, Water Resources Department, Barnai Canal Sub Division, Ambikapur, District Surguja (C.G.) .3? 1 WRIT PETITION UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDI ‘ / l A mm..5”7g8’/”w 200 W3“W (W) mmm WW§§¢W $aifaum s n ' R. JU CE P TI I 19.G8.2011 Shri A. K. Pat“, coun ! for the petitioner. Shri Pravin Das, Dy. .A. for the State. Heard. The present petitio has been filed by the petitioner aggrieved on ac ount of non—inclusion of the, period of service as daiiy ge for the purpose of grant of pensionary benefits. Learned counsei for the petitioner submits that now the government ha issued the circuiar dated 02.03.2005 (Annexure P— ) by which a decision has been taken to include ertain period of service. According to the petitione his case is covered by the new circular. Counsel for the petitioner submits that direction may be issued to the respondents to consider the case of the petitione in the light of the circular issued by the Government Learned State cou sel submits that let the petitioner make a detailed representation before respondent Nos. 2 & 3 an in turn the same would be ‘ decided in accordance wit law. _ L_.t imam Haw, “dame—13m 40—2/20i 1—1 ,sn,ono. mum Mm 3mm. mmwvsmo—z/zol 1—1 ,so,ooo. wW~s~w $537M mm ‘i 200 -mm(3§ha§w WWW wmm mmm mm %€tm Miraqm Accordingly the petjijtion is disposed of with a direction to the petitioner to fiie a fresh representation before respondent Nos. 2 & 3 within three weeks from today and in the eve tuaiity of filing any such representation the sam would be decided by the concerned authority in accordance with law as expeditiously as possible. It is made clear tha this court has not expressed any opinion on the merit of the case and the authority concerned would be at liberty to decide the representation strictly in ccordance with law after due scrutiny of the facts. Sd/— ay Pritinker Diwaker Judge