1 2025:CGHC:48300 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPS No. 9007 of 2023 1 - Sanat Kumar Shrivastava @ Sanat Shrivastava S/o. Late Sri L.L. Shrivastava, Aged About 66 Years R/o. House No.276/3, Behind Kukurdev Mandir, Kalkasha Chowk, Malighori Dudhali P.O. Dudhali, Thana - Doundi Lohara, Revenue, District - Balod, Chhattigarh. ... Petitioner(s) versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Secretary, Public Works Department, Mahanadi Bhawan, Naya Raipur, Atal Nagar, District - Raipur, Chhattisgarh. 2 - The Executive Engineer, Public Works Department Raipur (B And R) Division Balod, District - Balod, Pin 491226. 3 - The Sub- Divisional Officer, Public Works Department Raipur (B And R), Division Balod, District - Balod, Chhattisgrh. 4 - The Joint Director Treasury Accounts And Pension, Durg, District - Durg, Chhattisgarh. Pin -491001 ... Respondents (Cause-title taken from the Case Information System) ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- For Petitioner :- Mr. Sunil Sahu, Advocate For State :- Mr. Devesh G. Kela, P.L. For Respondent No. 3 :- Mr. Abhishek Singh, Advocate on behalf of Raj Kumar Gupta, Advocate ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- VISHAKHA BEOHAR Digitally signed by VISHAKHA BEOHAR 2 SB- Hon'ble Shri Justice Amitendra Kishore Prasad Order On Board 19.09.2025 1. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the present case is squarely covered by the decision rendered by this Court in Writ Petition (S) No.110 of 2023 (Krishna Prasad Vishwakarma vs. State of Chhattisgarh & Ors.) decided on 21.07.2025. It is submitted that the controversy involved in the present petition is identical, and therefore, this petition may also be disposed of in light of the said judgment. 2. Learned State counsel does not dispute the submission made by learned counsel for the petitioner and fairly submits that if the facts are identical, the same relief may be extended to the petitioner herein as well. 3. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record of the case. 4. From the perusal of the record, it appears that the issue raised in this petition is similar to the one adjudicated in Writ Petition (S) No.110 of 2023 (Krishna Prasad Vishwakarma). This Court in the said case has already taken a view on the issue involved. 5. Accordingly, without commenting upon the merits of the case, this petition is disposed of in light of the judgment passed in Writ Petition (S) No.110 of 2023 (Krishna Prasad Vishwakarma vs. State of Chhattisgarh & Ors.), with a direction to the 3 respondents to consider and pass appropriate orders in the case of the petitioner, if the case is covered by the aforesaid judgment, as expeditiously as possible, preferably within a period of 45 days from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. 6. With the aforesaid observation, the writ petition stands disposed of. sd/- (Amitendra Kishore Prasad) Judge Vishakha