Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Chhattisgarh · body

2025 DAILYLAW 34175 (CHH)

SANTRAM SAHU v. STATE OF CHHATTISGARH

WPS/6186/2018 · 2025-07-15

Shri Rakesh Mohan Pandey

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

1 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPS No. 6186 of 2018 1 - Santram Sahu S/o Late Shri Sonkar Sahu, Aged About 68 Years R/o Village Dewari, Police Station Bhatapara Rural, District Balodabazar Chhattisgarh., District : Balodabazar-Bhathapara, Chhattisgarh ... Petitioner(s) versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through Secretary, Department Of Co-Operative Society, Mahanadi Bhawan, Mantralaya, Naya Raipur, P.S. Rakhi, District Raipur Chhattisgarh., District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh 2 - Chhattisgarh State Co-Operative Marketing Federation Limited, Through Managing Director, Chhattisgarh State Co-Operative Marketing Federation Limited, 880, Civil Line, Raipur, District Raipur Chhattisgarh., District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh 3 - The Secretary, Chhattisgarh State Co-Operative Marketing Federation Limited, 880, Civil Line, Raipur, District Raipur Chhattisgarh., District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh 4 - The Manager (Establishment) Chhattisgarh State Co-Operative Marketing Federation Limited, 880, Civil Line, Raipur, District Raipur Chhattisgarh., District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh ---- Respondent For Petitioner : Mr. D.N. Prajapati, Advocate For State : Mr. Pramod Shrivastava, Dy.G.A. For respondents No.2 to 4 : Mr. Ashish Surana, Advocate Hon'ble Shri Justice Rakesh Mohan Pandey Order on Board 16.07.2025 1. Mr. Surana, learned counsel appearing for respondents No.2 to 4 would submit that a penalty of recovery to the tune of REKHA SINGH Digitally signed by REKHA SINGH -2- Rs.59,86,975/- has been passed in the departmental inquiry against the petitioner. He would further submit that the amount of gratuity has already been paid and the petitioner has not challenged the order passed by the Disciplinary Authority and therefore, the retiral dues of the petitioner have been recovered from the amount of retiral dues. 2. At this stage, Mr. Prajapati, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would seek permission of this Court to withdraw this petition with liberty to challenge the order passed by the Disciplinary Authority. 3. No objection from other side. 4. Permission is granted. 5. With the liberty as prayed for, the present petition is dismissed as withdrawn. Sd/- (Rakesh Mohan Pandey) Judge Rekha