Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Chhattisgarh · body

2025 DAILYLAW 24430 (CHH)

UDE RAM SAHU v. STATE OF CHHATTISGARH

WPS/4736/2023 · 2025-03-21

Shri Bibhu Datta Guru

Public Interest Litigationbody2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

1 / 3 2025:CGHC:13562 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPS No. 4736 of 2023 1 - Ude Ram Sahu S/o Late Bhulau Ram Sahu Aged About 71 Years Occupation Retired Permanent Unskilled Labour R/o Village Khurus Bod, Post And Thana Kanhera, Thasil Bemetara, District Bemetara (C.G.) ... Petitioner versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through Secretary, Department Of Public Works, Mantralaya, Mahanadi Bhawan, New Raipur, District Raipur (C.G.) 2 - Chief Engineer Department Of Public Works, Mantralaya, Mahanadi Bhawan, New Raipur, District Raipur (C.G.) 3 - Executive Engineer Department Of Public Works, National High Way Division No. 2, Raipur (Chhattisgarh) 4 - Senior Accounts Officer P.F. N. 40, Office Of The Accountant General, (Account/pension/fund) Near Zero Point, Near Vidhan Sabha, Raipur, District Raipur (C.G.) ... Respondents (Cause title is taken from Case Information System) 2 / 3 For Petitioner : Mr. Ashok Patil, Advocate For Respondents/ State : Mr. Ajit Singh, Govt. Advocate (HON’BLE SHRI JUSTICE BIBHU DATTA GURU) Order on Board 21/03/2025 1. By the present writ petition, the petitioner, who is a Septuagenarian, seeking a direction towards the respondent authorities to calculate and pay the pension and gratuity amount including the period spent in temporary status for qualifying service. 2. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would submit despite the fact that the petitioner has rendered his service in the respondent department for more than four decades his seniority has not been considered for computing the retiral dues. He would submit that the inaction on the part of the respondent is illegal and arbitrary. The petitioner retired from service and he is running from pillar to post for redressal of his grievances relating to retiral dues, but the same does not yield any result. 3. Learned counsel appearing for the respondents would submit that for redressal of any grievance regarding retiral dues of a retired employee, the State Government has constituted a High Power Pension Redressal Committee and the representatives of the Accountant General are also member therein, therefore, it will be appropriate to refer the present matter to the said Committee. 4. I have heard learned counsel for the parties, perused the documents. 3 / 3 5. Taking into consideration the fact that the grievance raised by the petitioner with regard to the settlement of retiral dues, the petitioner is directed to supply a copy of the writ petition to the Office of Advocate General and it is directed that the Office of Advocate General send the said writ petition to the High Power Pension Redressal Committee within a period of 15 days. In turn, the Committee shall, by intimating the same to the Office of Accountant General as well as the concerned Department including the petitioner, decide the grievance raised by the petitioner in accordance with law by giving opportunity of hearing to all the parties within a further period of 60 days. 6. With the aforesaid observation and direction, this writ petition is disposed of. Sd/- (BIBHU DATTA GURU) JUDGE Gowri/ $. Bhilwar