Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Chhattisgarh · body

2025 DAILYLAW 29972 (CHH)

Mahendra Kumar Bhide v. Pandit Ravishankar Shukla University Raipur

WPS/4002/2016 · 2025-01-09

Shri Sanjay K Agrawal

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

1 2025:CGHC:1522 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPS No. 4002 of 2016 Mahendra Kumar Bhide, S/o. Late Dattatray Bhide, Aged About 56 Years, Working As Senior Superintendent At Pandit Ravishankar Shukla University, Raipur, R/o. Q. No.24, S.B.I. Colony Mahoba Bazar, Raipur, District Raipur Chhattisgarh. ... Petitioners versus 1 - Pandit Ravishankar Shukla University Raipur, Through Registrar, Amanaka, G.E. Road, Raipur, Chhattisgarh. 2 - The Registrar, Pandit Ravishankar Shukla University Raipur, Chhattisgarh. 3 - Deputy Registrar, (Administraiton) & Enquiry Officer, Pandit Ravishankar Shukla University, Raipur, Chhattisgarh 4 - State Of Chhattisgarh, Through - Its Secretary, Department Of Higher Education Mantralay, Mahanadi Bhawan, Nava Raipur, Atal Nagar, Raipur, Chhattisgarh 5 - The Commissioner, Directorate Of Higher Education, H.Q. - Block - C, 2nd & 3rd Floor, Indrawati Bhawan, Nava Raipur, Atal Nagar, Raipur, Chhattisgarh ... Respondents ASHOK SAHU Digitally signed by ASHOK SAHU Date: 2025.01.10 16:32:48 +0530 2 For Petitioner : Mr. Rajesh Kumar Kesharwani, Advocate For Respondents No.1 to 3 : Mr. Neeraj Choubey, Advocate For Respondents No.4 & 5 : Mr. Rahul Tamaskar, Govt. Advocate Hon'ble Shri Justice Sanjay K. Agrawal Order On Board 09.01.2025 1. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the pensionary benefits of the petitioner have not been paid though he has retired from service on 19.03.2015 for which he may be allowed to make a representation to the respondents No.4 & 5 and in turn, the respondents No.4 & 5 may be directed to decide the same, as early as possible. 2. Be that as it may, if the petitioner makes a representation before the respondents No.4 & 5 within one month from today, the respondents No.4 & 5 are directed to consider and decide the same within a further period of two months by a reasoned and speaking order, in accordance with law. 3. In view of the aforesaid observation and direction, this writ petition stands finally disposed of. Sd/- (Sanjay K. Agrawal) Judge Ashok