Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Chhattisgarh · body

2025 DAILYLAW 45250 (CHH)

DINESH KUMAR TIWARI v. STATE OF CHHATTISGARH

WPS/8440/2024 · 2025-01-29

Shri Amitendra Kishore Prasad

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

1 2025:CGHC:5357 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPS No. 8440 of 2024 1 - Dinesh Kumar Tiwari S/o Late Gajanand Tiwari Aged About 62 Years R/o Pransi Suhag Bhandar, Gauri Ganesh Colony, Shubham Vihar, Mangla, Bilaspur, District - Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh. ... Petitioner versus 1 - State of Chhattisgarh Through Its Secretary, Department Of Co-Operative Affairs, Ministry At Mahanadi Bhawan, New Raipur Atal Nagar, District - Raipur, Chhattisgarh. 2 - Collector Bilaspur, District - Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh. 3 - Chief Executive Officer Zila Sahkari Kendriya Bank Maryadit Head Office - Nehru Chowk Sahkar Bhawan, Bilaspur, District - Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh. ... Respondents (Cause title is taken from Case Information System) For Petitioner : Shri Jai Prakash Shukla, Advocate For State/Respondents 1&2 : Shri Kanwaljeet Singh Saini, Panel Lawyer For Respondent No.3 : Shri Jitendra Shrivastava and Ms. Seema Verma, Advocates Hon’ble Shri Justice Amitendra Kishore Prasad Order on Board 29/01/2025 1. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that an accident took place when the petitioner was driving vehicle of respondent No.3 upon which a claim case was filed and joint liability was fastened upon respondent No.3 as well as the petitioner. It was further argued that respondent No.3 was the owner of the Digitally signed by GOPAL SINGH Date: 2025.02.13 11:17:24 +0530 2 vehicle as such liability would be upon the owner, however, holding that the petitioner was also held liable to pay joint liability has been fastened upon the petitioner as well as respondent No.3, as such the respondents authorities are not giving retiral dues of the petitioner though the petitioner was retired on 30.4.2022. 2. Learned counsel for respondent No.3, appearing on advance copy, submits that the petitioner has filed a representation before the authorities concerned and they will decide the representation of the petitioner in accordance with law. 3. The respondents authorities are directed to decide the representation of the petitioner in a pragmatic manner and to grant his retiral dues. 4. Respondent No.3/Chief Executive Officer is directed to decide the representation of the petitioner within a period of four weeks. 5. With the aforesaid observations and directions, the writ petition is disposed of. Sd/- (Amitendra Kishore Prasad) JUDGE Gopal Singh