1 2025:CGHC:51894 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR WPC No. 5485 of 2025 1 - Smt. Sulochani Kashyap W/o Late Tiharu Ram Kashyap Aged About 40 Years R/o Village And Post Jarve, Thana And Tehsil Janjgir, District Janjgir-Champa (Chhattisgarh) 2 - Hemlal Kashyap S/o Late Tiharu Ram Kashyap Aged About 22 Years R/o Village And Post Jarve, Thana And Tehsil Janjgir, District Janjgir-Champa (Chhattisgarh) 3 - Lingewar Kashyap D/o Late Tiharu Ram Kashyap Aged About 19 Years R/o Village And Post Jarve, Thana And Tehsil Janjgir, District Janjgir-Champa (Chhattisgarh) 4 - Mahesh Kashyap S/o Lachhiram Kashyap Aged About 62 Years R/o Village And Post Jarve, Thana And Tehsil Janjgir, District Janjgir- Champa (Chhattisgarh) 5 - Smt. Malti Kashyap W/o Mahesh Ramkashyap Aged About 56 Years R/o Village And Post Jarve, Thana And Tehsil Janjgir, District Janjgir-Champa (Chhattisgarh) ... Petitioner(s) versus 1 - Collector Janjgir, District Janjgir-Champa (C.G.) 2 - Tehsildar Janjgir, District Janjgir-Champa (C.G.) 3 - Raghunandan Yadav S/o Balak Ram Yadav Village And Post Jarve, Thana And Tehsil Janjgir, District Janjgir-Champa (C.G.) (Tractor Number Cg-11/ Da/ 6519, Trolley Number Cg-11/ Zg 2441, Owner) 2 4 - Branch Manager National Insurance Company Limited, Minu Complex Main Road Kosabadi, Korba District Korba (C.G.) (Tractor Number Cg-11/ Da/6519, Trolley Number Cg-11/ Zg 2441, Owner) ---- Respondents For Petitioners : Mr. K.P.S. Gandhi, Advocate For State : Mr. Soumitra Kesharwani, PL Hon'ble Shri Justice Arvind Kumar Verma Order on Board 17/10/2025 1. With the consent of counsel for the parties, the matter is heard finally. 2. By way of this petition, petitioner sought following relief(s) : “(i) That the Hon’ble Court may kindly be pleased to issue a writ of mandamus directing the respondent number no. 1 and 2 to decide the recovery of money order passed by learned Employee Compensation, Labour Court, Janjgir-Champa the petitioners within stipulated period. (ii) That, this Hon’ble Court may kindly be pleased to appropriate writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus the respondent no. 1 and 2 be direct to recover the amount of Rs.7,83,560/- with 12% interest as per order dated 03.06.2023 from respondent number 03 with due process of law. (iii) That, this Hon’ble Court may kindly be pleased to issue another appropriate writ, order or direction the impugned action of respondents of non-payment of claim amount to the petitioners in compliance of order dated 03.06.2023. (iv) Any other relief may also be granted in the case as may deem fit the Hon’ble Court as per the facts and circumstances of the case.” 3 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has filed an application under the Employees Compensation Act, 1923 seeking compensation on account of death of Tiharu Ram Kashyap in accident from respondent no. 3 claiming an amount of Rs.7,58,240/- with 12% interest and in addition to 50% penalty. Thereafter notices were issued to respondent no. 3 and 4 to remain present before the Employee Compensation, Labour Court, Janjgir-Champa then after hearing the Employee Compensation, Labour Court, Janjgir-Champa passed an order in favor of the petitioners of Rs.7,83,560/- and 12% interest from the date of accident against respondent no. 3. Thereafter, respondent no. 3 has not complied the order of Employe compensation, Labour Court, Janjgir-Champa and not depositing the compensation as per the order dated 03.06.2023 the petitioners move an application under Section 10 of Employee Compensation Act for recovery of amount which is not paid by the respondent no.3 as per the order dated 03.06.2023. After filing an application by the petitioners, the Commissioner Employee Compensation, Labour Court, Janjgir- Champa on 10.07.2024 sends a letter to respondent no. 1 for recovery of money. Thereafter on 20.09.2024 Dy. Collector sends a letter to respondent no. 2 regarding issuance of RRC as per Section 31 of Employee Compensation Act for recovery of money order passed by Learned Employee Compensation, Labour Court, Janjgir-Champa. 4 4. Learned counsel for the State submits that appropriate steps will be taken to redress the grievance of the petitioner at the earliest. 5. Heard learned counsel for the respective parties and perused the record with utmost circumspection. 6. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, nature of grievance raised in this writ petition, submissions of the counsels for the respective parties, instead of keeping this writ petition pending, I find it appropriate to dispose of this writ petition with a direction to the Respondents No.1 and 2 to conclude the recovery proceedings expeditiously, preferably within a further period of ‘08 weeks’ from the date of receipt of copy of this order. 7. With the aforesaid observation/direction, the petition stands disposed of. 8. It is made clear that this Court has not expressed any opinion with regard to the merits of the case. Sd/- (Arvind Kumar Verma) Judge Vasant