1 2026:CGHC:9504 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPS No. 1536 of 2026 Pradeep Hajare S/o Late Shri Jai Ram Hajare Aged About 53 Years Peon, Mahant Raja Balramdas, Govt. Multipurpose Higher Secondary School, Block Rajnandgaon, (State School) Distt.- Rajnandgaon (C.G.) ... Petitioner(s) Versus 1 - State Govt. Of C.G. Through- The Secretary, School Education Department Ministry, Mahanadi Bhawan, P.S. Rakhi, New Raipur, Distt.- Raipur (C.G.) 2 - Director Public Instruction Directorate, Indrawati Bhawan, Atal Nagar, New Raipur, Distt.- Raipur (C.G.) 3 - District Education Officer Rajnandgaon, District- Rajnandgaon (C.G.) 4 - Principal Mahant Raja Balramdas, Govt. Multipurpose Higher Secondary School, Block Rajnandgaon, (State School) District- Rajnandgaon (C.G.) ... Respondent(s) For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Ajay Shrivastava, Advocate For Respondent(s) : Mr. Siddhant Sharma, P.L. (HON’BLE SHRI JUSTICE PARTH PRATEEM SAHU) Order on Board 24/02/2026 1. Petitioner has filed this writ petition seeking following reliefs; “10.1 That, this Hon’ble Court may kindly be pleased to order respondent No. 2 to pay monthly pay to petitioner from January 2017 till date of superannuation or death an 12% interest on delayed payment of pay to disabled employee. 2 10.2 That cost of litigation and any other relief which the Hon’ble Court deems fit may kindly also be awarded.” 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner was working on the post of Peon suffered permanent disability to the extent of 80% and is bed ridden. According to the policy formulated by the State Government and the order issued in this regard dated 01.10.2005, the government employee who became permanent disabled to perform their duties are being provided salary till they attained the age of superannuation or till their death, whichever is earlier. Petitioner has submitted an application before respondent No. 1, however, till date no decision has been taken and therefore, direction be issued to respondent No. 1 to consider and decide the representation submitted by the petitioner. 3. Counsel for the respondent-State submits that in view of limited prayer made by counsel for the petitioner, he is having no objection. He however submits that the representation is to be submitted initially before the respondent No. 3 under whom petitioner is working however, petitioner has not submitted representation before respondent No. 3. 4. At this stage, counsel for the petitioner submits that he may be permitted to submit a representation before respondent No. 3 and direction be issued to take decision on the representation at the earliest, within specified time frame. 5. On due consideration of submission of counsel for the parties, this writ petition is disposed of permitting petitioner to submit comprehensive representation along with all supporting documents before respondent No. 3 and if such a representation is submitted the concerned authority 3 shall take decision on the representation to be submitted by the petitioner, in accordance with law expeditiously, preferably within further period of five months from the date of receipt of the representation. 6. With the aforesaid observation and direction, this writ petition stands disposed of. Sd/- (Parth Prateem Sahu) JUDGE Saurabh