1 2025:CGHC:16130 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPS No. 2320 of 2025 1 - Punit Ram Sahu S/o Dayalu Ram Sahu Aged About 67 Years (Retired Gardener), R/o Village - Anjora, District - Durg (C.G.) ... Petitioner(s) versus 1 - State of Chhattisgarh Through - The Secretary, Department Of Urban Administration, Mahanadi Bhawan, Mantralaya, Atal Nagar, Nawa Raipur, District - Raipur (C.G.) 2 - Director Directorate, Urban Administration Department, Indrawati Bhawan, Mantralaya, Atal Nagar, Nawa Raipur, District - Raipur (C.G.) 3 - Deputy Director Pension, Urban Administration Department, Indrawati Bhawan, Mantralaya, New Raipur, District - Raipur (C.G.) 4 - Commissioner Municipal Corporation, Durg, District - Durg (C.G.) ... Respondent(s) For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Praveen Dhurandhar, Advocate. For Respondents/State : Mr. Kanwaljeet Singh Saini, Panel Lawyer Hon’ble Shri Bibhu Datta Guru, Judge AMARDEEP CHOUBEY Digitally signed by AMARDEEP CHOUBEY Date: 2025.04.11 10:47:09 +0530 2 Order on Board 07/04/2025 1. By the present writ petition, the petitioner has prayed for following relief:- 10.1 That, the Hon'ble Court be pleased to direct the respondent authorities to release/make payment of amount of gratuity to the petitioner as per its memo dated 11-11-2024 (Annexure P-2). 10.2 That, the Hon'ble Court be pleased to direct the respondent authorities to take decision over the representation dated 03-03-2025 (Annexure P-3) within stipulated period of time. 10.3 That, this Hon’ble Court may kindly be pleased to grant any other relief, as it may deems fit and appropriate. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is pressing this writ petition only with respect to the relief claimed on gratuity and not with respect to the pension. He submits that the petitioner may be permitted to submit a representation in light of the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Netram Sahu Vs. State of Chhattisgarh reported in (2018) 5 SCC 430 and the concerned authority be directed to take decision on the representation to be submitted by the petitioner within the specified time frame. 3. On the other hand, learned counsel for the respondents/State submits that as the petitioner is not pressing this writ petition on merits and is only seeking a direction to submit a representation in light of the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Netram Sahu (Supra), towards claim of 3 gratuity, he is having no objection. He however, submits that the case of Netram Sahu is referred to larger bench of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Dhansai Sahu Vs. State of Chhattisgarh & Ors (2020) 19 SCC 808. 4. I have heard learned counsel for the respective parties and perused the documents placed on record. 5. Taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of the case, nature of grievance raised, submission of counsel for the respective parties, the writ petition is disposed of at this stage, permitting petitioner to submit representation before the Respondents No. 2 & 4 raising all the grounds as raised in this writ petition with respect to gratuity. In the event petitioner submits representation, concerned authority shall consider and decide the same in accordance with law expeditiously, preferably within a further period of 03 months from the date of receipt of the representation. 6. With above observation and direction, the writ petition stands disposed of. SD/- (Bibhu Datta Guru) Judge Amardeep