^<s£^ ^^^^.-K IN THE HIGH_CQU.RTOECHHAmSGARH AT.BILASPUR PETITIONER Sf-i W.P.No. |5^^-/06 * . Ram Singh Sato^iui S/o Ledu 'C Satnami ageA abpyt 51 years Occupation; - ^gfevice.. (DaUy paid employee iri 'PWD) R/o ViUage Ainer^Mftt; Post office Pihrid, Tah: Sakti District Janjgir-Cham.pa C.G T'.E VERSUS RESPONDENTS A / ^' <<" '.l'h o -^' A yf •^}- y -^ <^ \py ^ 1. State of Chhattisgarh, Through Secretary 85 Ministry of PubUc Work Department D.K.S. Bhawan Raipur C.G />'o1i^> 2. Chief Engmeer PubUc Work •^ Departinent, BUaspur C.G. 3. Superintendent Engineer ^PubUc Work Departaient, BUaspur C.G. 4. Executiye ; Engineer . PubUc Work Department Cham.pa Division District- Jaf'ggH'- Champa C.G. 5. Sub-Divisional Officer PubUc ^-Work Departinent Sub- Division Janjgir- Champa C.G. 6. Sub-Engifteer PubUc Work Department Sub Divisional -^ Office No.l, SaMi, District Janjgir C.G. . WRYF PET!TION UNDERARTICALE 226Z22SC CONSTITUTION OF INDIA THE p Q^. HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE CHHATTISGARH: BILASPUR Sin^le Beach: Hoa'ble Shri Satlsh K. Agnihotrl, J. W. P. No. 1577 CW2Q06 Petitioner : Ram Siagh. Versus Respondents : State ofC.G. aad others. Shri Y. Chaturvedi, counsel for fhe. petitioner. Shri Sushil Dubey, Govemiaent Advocate for the respondents. 2. ORAL ORDER (29th March, 2006) The petitioner, einployed as Gang Man, was retired on coiapletion of 30 years of service. The petitioner filed a writpetitionbeiugW.P, No. 1928/2004, seekmg a relief to direct ftie respondents to retire fhe petitioner on superaanuation at the age pf60 years. This Court while hearing the above inentioned writ petition along wifh other petitions whereirt, the sauie issue was involved, directed fhe respondents to allow Gang Men, who had retired on coinpletion of 30 years of service to rejoin the services aad continue tiU they attain the age of60 years. On the question of regularization, the petition was rejected reserviug liberty to the petitioners to raise the .fy'" issue of regularization before appropriate foruin, if necessary, 4. The State Govenunent by orier dated 30.3.2005 deleted fhe clause, 'who on completion of 30 years of service' for retireinent in fhe case of Gang inen wifh prospectiye effect. However, this Court after having considered fhe facts and circunistances of the case and order/circular dated 30.3.2005 directed the respondents to consider even those cases where gang inen had retired prior to 30.3.05, aad to permit fhem. to continue till fhey attaui the age of 60 years. The petitioner was granted reUef accordingty. 5. In the present case fhe petitioner has sought for payment of back wages froin the date of his retircinent on conipletion of 30 years of service tiU date of retastateiiieiit, pursuaut to the order dated 20fh Septeinber, 2005, passed by fhis Court in earUer petitionW.P. No. 1928/2004, ffledbythe petitioner. 6. In the facts and circuiastances of the case, when the petitioner had no right to be reiustated aad ftie petitioner was allowed to continue on the basis of subsequent order dated 30.3.2005 which was niade efFective w.e.f. 30.3.2005. Direction to niake paynient of back wages to fhe petitioner on a simple prmciple of 'no work no pay', woiild defeat fhe purpose of the order/circular dated 30.3.2005 read with order dated 20.9.2005, passed by this CoT-H-t; C'-9~ 7. Having regard to fhe facts aad circumstaiices of fhe case and inaterial on retord, this petition deserves to be disinissed. The petition is accordingly disinissed. No order as to costs. - Sd/- SatishK.Agnihotn Judge