1 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPS No. 6736 of 2021  Ramratan Ratre S/o Sonaku Ratre Aged About 62 Years Retired Head Mater (At Govt. Middle School Uchchbhatthi, Block Sarangarh, District Raigarh), R/o Village Bhathagaon, Post Kosir, Police Station, Block Sarangarh, District Raigarh, Chhattisgarh ... Petitioner(s) versus 1. State Of Chhattisgarh Through Secretary, Department Of School Education, Mahanadi Bhawan, Mantralaya New Raipur, District Raipur, Chhattisgarh 2. General Accountant (Lekha And Akdari) Zero Point Baloda Bazar Road, Raipur, Chhattisgarh 3. Collector Raigarh Division Raigarh, Chhattisgarh 4. The Joint Director Treasury Account And Pension Raigarh Division Raigarh, Chhattisgarh 5. District Education Officer Raigarh Division Raigarh, Chhattisgarh 6. Block Education Officer Block Sarangarh, Distrisct Raigarh, Chhattisgarh ... Respondent(s) For Petitioner : Mr. Vivek Shrivastava, Advocate For State : Mr. Amandeep Singh, P.L. For Respondent No. 2 : Mr. Ashwini Shukla, Advocate Hon’ble Shri Justice Rakesh Mohan Pandey Judgment On Board Digitally signed by AJINKYA PANSARE Date: 2026.05.12 18:00:12 +0530 2 11.5.2026 1) By way of this petition, the petitioner has sought the following relief(s):- (i) That, this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to direct the respondent authorities to release rest amount Rs. 3,44,014/- of the General Provident Fund with interest of 18% within stipulated period, in the interest of justice. (ii) Any other relief which may be suitable in the facts and circumstances of the case, may also be granted. 2) Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that respondent authorities have withheld the amount of Rs. 3,44,014/- of General Provident Fund and petitioner is seeking for limited prayer with a direction to the respondent authorities to release the aforestated amount. 3) On the other hand, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respective respondents would oppose. They submit that certain recent withdrawals were not posted in GPF passbook and due to this discrepancy, excess closing balance appeared in GPF passbook. He further submits that closing balance of GPF passbook i.e. Rs.9,30,820/- is not proper and the correct closing balance i.e. Rs. 5,86,806 with interest up to April, 2021 had been authorized in favor of petitioner. He contends that since no amount is left unpaid, no case is made out for interference and this petition deserves to be dismissed. 4) Heard. 5) Taking into consideration the fact that disputed questions of facts 3 are involved in the present case, therefore, this matter is referred to the High Power Pension Redressal Committee to decide the dispute. The committee is directed to decide the entitlement of the petitioner pertaining to GPF after affording a due opportunity of hearing to the petitioner and other interested parties, preferably within period of six months from the date of receipt of copy of this order. Office of Advocate General is directed to supply one copy of this petition along with necessary documents to the said committee. Sd/- (Rakesh Mohan Pandey) JUDGE A j i n k y a