1 2025:CGHC:56685 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPS No. 10910 of 2019 Gaurishankar Pandey S/o Gorelal Pandey Aged About 62 Years R/o Village- Teliya Puran, Post- Semarsar, Police Station- Jarhagaon, Tahsil- Lormi, District- Mungeli, Chhattisgarh. ... Petitioner. versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Secretary, Panchayat And Rural Development Department, Mahanadi Bhawan, Mantralay, Atal Nagar, Nawa Raipur, District- Raipur, Chhattisgarh. 2 - The Collector Mungeli District- Mungeli, Chhattisgarh. 3 - The Chief Executive Officer Jila Panchayat Mungeli, District- Mungeli, Chhattisgarh. 4 - The Chief Executive Officer Janpad Panchayat, Lormi, District- Mungeli, Chhattisgarh. ... Respondents. For Petitioner : Shri Chandrikaditya Pandey appears on behalf of Shri Dharmesh Srivastava, Advocates. For State/Res. Nos.1 and 2 : Shri Amandeep Singh, Panel Lawyer. For Respondent Nos.3 and 4 : Ms. Natasha Khan, Advocate. SB : Hon'ble Shri Justice Deepak Kumar Tiwari Order on Board 21/11/2025 1. This Writ Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India has been filed for the following reliefs:- AVINASH SHARMA Digitally signed by AVINASH SHARMA Date: 2025.11.21 15:22:09 +0530 2 10.1 That, this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to call for the entire records pertaining to the case of the petitioner for grant of pensionary benefit and retiral dues. 10.2 That, this Honble Court may kindly be pleased to issue an appropriate writ directing the respondents to consider the case of the petitioner in light of order passed by the Hon'ble Division Bench of the High Court of Chhattisgarh on 26.02.2015 (Annexure P-5). 10.3 This Hon'ble Court may further kindly be pleased to issue an appropriate writ commanding the respondents to release/give the pension in favour of the petitioner within the period of 2 months. 10.4 Any other relief/ relief's, which this Hon'ble Court may think fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case, with cost of the petition, may also please be granted to the petitioner. 2. At the outset, learned counsel for the respondents submit that services of the petitioner is not a pensionable service and in the Petition, there is no averment that under which Rule, the petitioner is claiming grant of pension. They would further submit that even the ratio laid down regarding grant of pension to the temporary employees has been further challenged by the State before the Hon’ble Supreme Court, which is under consideration in SLP (Civil) Nos.8677-8678/2023 and the co- ordinate Bench of this Court while disposing of the bunch of writ 3 petitions i.e. WPS No.10696/20191 and connected matters on 14.10.2024, materially observed at Para 6, which reads as under:- "6. Accordingly, the bunch of these writ petitions (s) deserve to be disposed of with a direction that the judgment passed by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in SLP (C) No. 8677-8678/2023 will be applicable mutatis mutandis in the facts and circumstances of the case of the petitioners and their entitlement to get additional pension will be governed by the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in SLP ( C) No. 8677-8678/2023. It is also directed that if SLP (C) No. 867-8678 of 2023 is decided in favour of the petitioners, the respondents shall extend the benefit to the petitioners without any further delay. It is also directed that if the grievance of the petitioners still exists, the petitioners shall be at liberty to file a fresh petition raising their grievances." 3. Counsel for the petitioner, at this juncture, would submit that this Petition may be disposed of with a direction that the case of the petitioner may be re-examined by the respondent authorities after the outcome of SLP (Civil) Nos.8677-8678/2023. 4. Counsel for the State would not oppose the aforesaid prayer. 5. Having regard to the aforesaid submissions and considering that limited relief has been sought and for the reason that issue pertaining to grant of pension, counting of service is pending before the Hon’ble Supreme Court in SLP (Civil) Nos.8677-8678/2023, it is directed that after the outcome of SLP (Civil) Nos.8677-8678/2023, the Authorities concerned 1 Bhagbali Kashyap Vs. State of CG and Ors and connected matters decided on 14.10.2024 {2024:CGHC:40132} 4 shall re-examine the case of the petitioner in this regard and pass appropriate order. If any grievance still remains, the petitioner would be at liberty to raise his grievance in accordance with law. 6. Accordingly, this Writ Petition is disposed of. Sd/- (Deepak Kumar Tiwari) Judge Avinash