Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Chhattisgarh · body

2025 DAILYLAW 4011 (CHH)

YUGENDRA PRAKASH LAVI v. STATE OF CHHATTISGARH

WPS/401/2025 · 2025-01-31

Shri Amitendra Kishore Prasad

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

1 2025:CGHC:5884 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPS No. 401 of 2025 1 - Yugendra Prakash Lavi S/o Late Shri Dayalu Levi Aged About 68 Years Retired Internal Accounts And Taxation Officer, R/o Qr.No. 145, Nadan Gali, Shanti Nagar Ward, Jagdalpur, District Bastar, C.G. ... Petitioner(s) versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Secretary, Panchayat Department, Ministry, Mahanadi Bhavan, New Raipur, Atal Nagar, District Raipur C.G. 2 - The Director Directorate Of Panchayat, Sector-19, North Block, Development Building, Ground Floor, New Raipur, Atal Nagar, District Raipur C.G. 3 - The Divisional Joint Director Treasury Account And Pension, Near Nagar Ghadi Chowk, Raipur, District Raipur C.G. 4 - Deputy Director Department Of Panchayat, District South Bastar Dantewada C.G. 5 - Chief Executive Officer Janpad Panchayat Katekalyan, District South, Bastar Dantewada, C.G. ... Respondent(s) Digitally signed by RAGHVENDRA JAT 2 For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Alok Kumar Dewangan, Advocate. For Respondent(s) No. 1 to 4 /State : Mr. Saumitra Kesharwani, Panel Lawyer. Hon’ble Mr. Justice Amitendra Kishore Prasad Order on Board 31/01/2025 1. By way of this petition, the petitioner has prayed for following reliefs:- “10.1 The Hon'ble court may kindly be pleased to direct the Respondents to pay amount of General Provident Fund (G.P.F.) and arrears of third timescale pay to the petitioner, imposing suitable interest @ 18% per annum from the due date till the date of actual payment in the account of the petitioner in the interest of justice. 10.2 That, the Hon'ble court may kindly be pleased to direct the Respondents to make payment of expense for unnecessary litigation and compensation for undue suffering to the petitioner. 10.3 This Hon'ble court may kindly be pleased to call for entire records from the office of the respondents in respect of petitioner's claim. 10.4 That, any other writ, order, directions or relief which 3 the petitioner is entitle and this Hon'ble Court may deem fit may kindly be passed in favour of the petitioner.” 2. Brief facts of the case, is that, the petitioner is retired Internal Accounts and Taxation Officer, and his last posting was in the office of Chief Executive Officer, Janpad Panchayat Katekalyan, Department of Panchayat, District- South Bastar Dantewada, C.G. The petitioner was retired on 31.12.2018 after attaining the age of superannuation. He did not receive payment of General Provident Fund (GPF) and arrears of third timescale pay till date. The petitioner submits that his G.P.F. Account No. is CCP/22183 and petitioner after attending the age of superannuation retired on 31.12.2018 and thereafter 6 years have passed, despite several representations and personal visit in the office of the respondents, GPF amount and arrears of third timescale pay is not been paid to the petitioner till filing of this petition. Since the petitioner has been harassed without any reason thus he is praying for release of 18% interest on delayed payment of GPF and arrears of third timescale pay with suitable compensation for his undue suffering. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is not being granted his service benefits after his retirement as such there must be some reason and at this stage learned counsel for the petitioner submits that on instruction the petitioner has also 4 prayed for grant of benefit of 7th pay scale though the same has not been stated in the relief column. 4. On the other hand, learned counsel appearing for the State opposes the submission. 5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the material available on record. 6. Considering the aforesaid aspect of the matter, at this stage the writ petition is disposed of directing the petitioner to file a representation raising all his grievances before the authorities concerned within a period of one week and, in turn, the concerned authorities are directed to decide the said representation within a period of four weeks, in accordance with law. 7. With this observation and direction, the instant petition stands disposed of. Sd/- (Amitendra Kishore Prasad) Judge Raghu Jat