1 2025:CGHC:35893 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPS No. 3314 of 2021 1 - Narendra Kumar Dubey S/o R. J. Dubey Aged About 58 Years Working As Sub Engineer-Nagar Panchayat Bilha Bilaspur Chhattisgarh 2 - Raj Kumar Jain S/o Late Vijay Kumar Jain Aged About 52 Years Working As Sub Engineer-Nagar Palika Nigam, Durg District Durg Chhattisgarh 3 - Suresh Gupta S/o Late Shri Chandrika Prasad Gupta Aged About 57 Years Working As Sub Engineer- Office Of The Resional Office, Joint Director, Urban Administration, Raipur Chhattisgarh 4 - D. R. Sahu S/o Late Lakhan Lal Sahu Aged About 57 Years Working As Sub Engineer-Nagar Panchayat Utai, District Durg Chhattisgarh 5 - Prashant Kumar Shukla S/o Vidyabhushan Shukla Aged About 56 Years Working As Sub Engineer-Nagar Palika Nigam, Bhilai, Charoda, District Durg Chhattisgarh 6 - Uma Shankar Singh S/o Mahipat Singh Aged About 54 Years Working As Sub Engineer-Nagar Panchayat Navagarh, District Durg Chhattisgarh 7 - Ganesh Namdeo S/o Shri Devi Prasad Namdeo Aged About 50 Years Working As Sub Engineer-Nagar Panchayat Patan, District Durg Chhattisgarh ... Petitioner(s) versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Secretary, Department Of Urban Administration And Development, Mahanadi Bhawan, Mantralaya, Atal Nagar, Naya Raipur P. S. And P. O. Rakhi, District Raipur Chhattisgarh 2 2 - Director Directorate Of Urban Administration And Development Department, Nava Raipur Chhattisgarh 3 - Secretary Finance And Planning Department, Atal Nagar, Nava Raipur Chhattisgarh ... Respondent(s) For Petitioners : Mr. Neeraj Choubey, Advocate along with Ms. M. Asha, Advocate For State : Mr. Raj Kumar Gupta, Addl. A.G. Hon’ble Shri Justice Rakesh Mohan Pandey Order On Board 24-07-2025 1) By way of this petition, petitioners have sought following reliefs:- i. To call for the entire records available in the office of the Respondents pertaining to the case of petitioners. ii. That the Hon'ble High Court may kindly be pleased to direct the respondent authority to granted the benefits of the Old Pension Scheme as per the circular dated 01.08.2012 as well as 29.06.2020 to the petitioners. iii. That the Hon'ble High Court may kindly be pleased to direct to the respondent authority decide the pending to representation of the petitioners (Annexure-P/11). iv. Any other relief or relief(s) which this Hon'ble Court may think proper in view of the facts and circumstances of the case may also kindly be granted. 2) Learned counsel for the petitioners submit that petitioners are working under various Municipal Councils in the State of Chhattisgarh since 2005 on the post of Sub-Engineers. The Secretary, Finance And Planning Department, State of Chhattisgarh issued a circular on 01.08.2012 in respect of 3 implementation of New Pension Scheme wherein it is stated that New Pension Scheme would be applicable on the employees working under Urban Administration Department, who were appointed on or after 01.04.2012 whereas petitioners were appointed in the year 2005, therefore, respondent authorities are under obligation to consider the claim of petitioners to extend the benefit of Old Pension Scheme. They further submit that a decision has been taken by the State Government to extend the benefit of Old Pension Scheme to all employees vide gazette notification dated 11.05.2022. They contend that petitioners may be permitted to make representation(s) before respondent authorities, who in turn may be directed to decide such representation(s) in accordance with law. 3) On the other hand, learned State counsel submits that according to notification dated 27.10.2004, New Pension Scheme would be applicable on employees appointed on or after 01.11.2004. He contends that this petition deserves to be dismissed. 4) Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the documents placed on record. 5) Taking into consideration the limited prayer made by petitioners, at this juncture, this petition is hereby being disposed of reserving liberty in favor of petitioners to make separate representation(s) before respondents No. 1 and 3 within period of 15 days from today and the authorities concerned are directed to decide such 4 representation(s), if so moved by petitioners strictly in accordance with the existing rules, preferably within a period of 120 days from the date of receipt of copy of this order. 6) Petitioners would be at liberty to raise all grounds available to them in their representation(s). 7) With the aforesaid direction(s), this petition stands disposed of. Sd/- (Rakesh Mohan Pandey) JUDGE Ajinkya