-1- 2025:CGHC:24890 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPS No. 4036 of 2018 Surendra Singh Thakur S/o Late Gopal Singh Thakur Aged About 66 Years Retired Vyavsayik Prashishak, Government Ashryadatt Karmshala, Bilaspur, District Bilaspur Chhattisgarh. R/o Om Nagar, Jarhabhata, Bilaspur, District Bilaspur Chhattisgarh. ... Petitioner versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Secretary, Social Welfare Department, Mantralaya, Mahanadi Bhawan, New Raipur, District Raipur Chhattisgarh. 2 - Director, Social Welfare Department, Mantralaya, Mahanadi Bhawan, New Raipur, District Raipur Chhattisgarh., District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh. 3 - Accountant General Zero Point, Baloda Bazar Road, Raipur, District Raipur Chhattisgarh., District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh. 4 - Superintendent, Government Asthi Badhitarth Balgrah, Mana Camp Raipur, District Raipur Chhattisgarh., District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh. 5 - Superintendent Government Aashraydatt Karmshala, Tifra, Bilaspur, District Bilaspur Chhattisgarh. ... Respondent(s) For Petitioner : Mr. Shashi Kumar Kushwaha, Advocate For State : Mr. Lav Sharma, Panel Lawyer For Respondent No.3 : Mr. Raj Kumar Gupta, Advocate Hon'ble Shri Justice Rakesh Mohan Pandey Order on Board 17.06.2025 1) The petitioner has filed this petition seeking the following relief(s):- “10.1. That the Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to allow the petition by directing the respondents to pay Rs. 1,73,908/- to the petitioner due to late payment of retiral dues for which no justification has been made, hence the same be granted. Digitally signed by NADIM MOHLE -2- 10.2 Costs of the petition be awarded and 10.3 Any other relief or direction which the Hon'ble Court may deems fit, be also awarded.” 2) Mr. Kushwaha, learned counsel for the petitioner, submits that the petitioner, who was posted as a Professional Instructor under the respondent department, retired from service on 30.06.2015. He further submits that there was a delay in the payment of retiral dues, including Family Welfare Fund, Group Insurance Scheme, Leave Encashment, Gratuity, etc. Therefore, he contends that the petitioner is entitled to get interest on the delayed payment. 3) On the other hand, learned counsel appearing for the respondents submits that the amount of GPF was paid along with interest; hence, the petitioner is not entitled to any further interest. It is further submitted that the department, after scrutinizing the entire service record, has made payment of the remaining retiral dues to the petitioner. 4) Heard. 5) Taking into consideration the limited prayer made by the petitioner, it is directed that if the petitioner makes a representation before respondent No.5, the authority concerned is directed to consider and decide the same strictly in accordance with law within a period of 120 days from the date of receipt of such representation. 6) With the aforesaid observation and direction, this writ petition stands disposed of. 7) It is made clear that the earlier order dated 09.04.2018, whereby the claim for payment of interest was rejected, would not come in the way while deciding the representation. Sd/- (Rakesh Mohan Pandey) Judge Nadim