2025:CGHC:30529 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPS No. 5653 of 2025 Smt. Gangavati Ratre W/o Late Banshiram Ratre Aged About 46 Years R/o Village - Pelma, Post - Jamarga, Tahsil - Dharamjaigarh, District - Raigarh (C.G.) ... Petitioner(s) versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through Secretary, Department Of School Education, Mantralaya, Mahanadi Bhawan, Nawa Raipur, Atal Nagar (C.G.) 2 - Director Directorate Of Public Instructions, Indravati Bhawan, Nawa Raipur, Atal Nagar (C.G.) 3 - Collector Raigarh, District - Raigarh (C.G.) 4 - Joint Director Education Division Bilaspur, District - Bilaspur (C.G.) 5 - District Education Officer Raigarh, District - Raigarh (C.G.) 6 - Block Education Officer Dharamjaigarh, District - Raigarh (C.G.) ...Respondents (Cause title is taken from the CIS) ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ For Petitioner : Ms Mahima Chandra, Advocate on behalf of Ms Hamida Siddiqui, Advocate For Respondents/State : Shri Mayur Khandelwal, PL ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Hon'ble Shri Justice Ravindra Kumar Agrawal Order on Board 04.07.2025 1. Petitioner has filed this writ petition seeking following reliefs: “10.1 This Hon’ble Court may kindly be pleased to issue a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ directing the respondent authorities to release the family pension to the petitioner as the legally Digitally signed by V PADMAVATHI Date: 2025.07.07 17:11:51 +0530 Wps 5653 of 2025 2 wedded wife of the deceased government employee Late Banshiram Ratre, along with arrears and interest. 10.2 That, this Hon’ble Court may kindly be pleased to direct the respondent authorities to consider and decide the petitioner’s representations dated 16.04.2025 within a stipulated time frame. 10.3 Any other relief may also be granted to the Petitioner which this Hon’ble Court deemed fit in facts and circumstances of the case.” 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner restricted her prayer that petitioner may be permitted to file fresh representation before respondent-6 and then respondent-6 may be directed to decide the representation expeditiously, as the matter pertains to Family Pension. 3. Learned counsel for the State would submit that he has no objection if such direction is being given to the authorities concerned to decide the fresh representation filed by the petitioner within stipulated time frame. 4. Considering the nature of dispute raised between the parties, it is directed that petitioner shall move fresh representation before respondent-6 within two weeks from today, and the authorities shall decide the same strictly in accordance with law in an expeditious manner, considering the entire facts, as well as law applicable in the said representation. 5. Petitioner is directed to produce copy of this order to respondent- 6. 6. With the aforesaid observation, present writ petition stands disposed of. Sd/- (Ravindra Kumar Agrawal) JUDGE padma