1 2025:CGHC:15816 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR REVP No. 129 of 2024 1 - Dr. Nagina Tandan W/o Late Dr. R.P. Tandan Aged About 58 Years R/o Gitanjali Vihar 47, Nehru Nagar, Bilaspur, District Bilaspur (C.G.) ... Petitioner versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Secretary, Dept. Of Higher Education, Mantralaya, Mahanadi Bhawan, Atal Nagar, Nawa Raipur, District Raipur (C.G.) 2 - Commissioner/director Directorate Of Higher Education, Indrawati Bhawan, Atal Nagar, Nawa Raipur, District Raipur (C.G.) 3 - Principal Govt. College, Kotari, District Mungeli (C.G.) 4 - Divisional Joint Director Treasury Account And Pension, Bilaspur, District Bilaspur (C.G.) 5 - Accountant General Zero Point, Near Avinash Garden City, Raipur Baloda Bazar Road, Opposite Vidhan Sabha Road, Barauda, Chhattisgarh. ... Respondents For Petitioner : Mr. Pawan Shrivastava, Advocate. For Respondents/State : Mr. Rajeev Bharat, Govt. Advocate. Hon’ble Mr. Justice Naresh Kumar Chandravanshi Order on Board 03/04/2025 Heard. 1. This petition has been preferred by the petitioner seeking review of the order dated 10.01.2024 (Annexure P-1) passed by Coordinate Bench of this Court in Writ Petition (S) No. 3830 of 2022 (Dr. Nagina Tandan vs. State of Chhattisgarh & others), whereby, this Court has passed the following order :- 2 “7. Resultantly, with the aforesaid observations, the instant petition is disposed of impugned order dated 01.10.2021 (Annexure P-1) is set aside. The Respondents are directed to return entire amount of Rs. 35,256/- which was deposited by the Petitioner through chalan dated 21.10.2021. The Respondents are further directed to release entire withheld amount of gratuity with interest @ 12% per annum till realization of the Petitioner. The above exercise will be done within a period 60 days from the date of receipt of certified copy of this order.” 2. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that retiral dues have been paid to the petitioner, but 12% interest has not been paid on arrears of retiral dues, hence, the respondents may be directed to pay aforesaid interest on the same. 3. Per contra, learned counsel for the State submits that all retiral dues have been paid to the petitioner and, therefore, the instant review petition is liable to be rejected. 4. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the material available on record. 5. Perusal of order under review dated 10.01.2024 passed in Writ Petition (S) No. 3830 of 2022 would show that vide aforesaid order, 12% interest on entire withheld amount of gratuity was granted in favour of the petitioner. But, in aforesaid order, it has not been observed that which retiral dues was paid to the petitioner on which date and interest is payable or not and if it is payable, then from which date it is payable. 3 6. In the instant review petition, the petitioner is seeking review of the order dated 10.01.2024 passed in WPS No. 3830 of 2022 only to grant interest in belated payment of retiral dues. But, it has not been specifically stated by the petitioner that which retiral dues was paid to him on which date. Such relief, as sought for by the petitioner, cannot be granted in the instant review petition. Therefore, I do not feel inclined to allow the instant review petition. 7. Accordingly, review petition fails and is hereby dismissed. However, the petitioner is at liberty to file fresh petition, if any grievance is left with her in respect of her retiral dues. 8. Pending application, if any, stands disposed of. No order as to costs. Sd/- (Naresh Kumar Chandravanshi) Judge Amit/- AMIT KUMAR DUBEY Digitally signed by AMIT KUMAR DUBEY Date: 2025.04.09 17:14:50 +0530