Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Chhattisgarh · body

2026 DAILYLAW 13835 (CHH)

HULASH RAM SAHU v. STATE OF CHHATTISGARH

WPS/2462/2022 · 2026-04-30

Shri Rakesh Mohan Pandey

body2026

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

1 2026:CGHC:20415 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPS No. 2462 of 2022 1 - Hulash Ram Sahu S/o Bhagwat Ram Sahu Aged About 32 Years R/o Village Partewa, Post Deori, Tehsil Rajim, District Gariyaband, Chhattisgarh ... Petitioner(s) versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through Commissioner Of Tribal Welfare Department, Raipur, District Raipur, Chhattisgarh 2 - Collector Cum President, Prayas Awasiya Vidyalaya, Ambikapur, District Surguja, Chhattisgarh 3 - Assistant Commissioner Tribal Welfare Department, Ambikapur, District Surguja, Chhattisgarh 4 - Sun Mega Ventures Pvt. Ltd. Through The Director Plot A7, Shailendra Nagar, Raipur, Chhattisgarh 5 - Motion Education Pvt. Ltd. Through The Director 394, Rajeev Gandhi Nagar Kota, Rajasthan, District : Kota, Rajasthan 6 - Motion Education Pvt. Ltd. Through Authorised Representative Arun Upadhyay Aged About 50 Yrs, S/o Ramraj Upadhyay, R/o People 4, Housingh Board Colony Raipur, District Raipur, Chhattisgarh ... Respondent(s) For Petitioner : Ms. K. Radhika, Advocate For State : Mr. Kanwaljeet Singh Saini, Dy. G.A. For Respondents No. 4 to 6 : Mr. Navin Shukla, Advocate Hon’ble Shri Justice Rakesh Mohan Pandey Order On Board 1.5.2026 1) By way of this petition, petitioner has sought following reliefs:- 10.1 issue notices to the Respondent No.2 and Respondent No. 4, returnable within early date of 2 hearing. 10.2 Direct the Respondent No.2 and Respondent No.4 for payment of salary to the petitioner with 18% interest per annum within stipulated period. 10.3 Issue any other relief(s)/ order(s)/ direction(s) in favour of petitioner, which deemed fit & proper in the facts & circumstances of the case, in the interest of justice. 10.4 Cost of the petition. 2) Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner has not been paid the salary of months January, 2020 to April, 2020 along with leave encashment of 13 days. 3) On the other hand, learned counsel appearing for the respondents No. 4 to 6 submits that in para-14 of reply, a stand has been taken that petitioner is not co-operating, therefore salary of April, 2020 and leave encashment of 13 days has been withheld. He further submits that if petitioner would co-operate, respondents No. 4 to 6 would pay the remaining dues at the earliest. 4) Heard. 5) Taking into consideration the above discussed facts, petitioner is directed to approach respondents No. 4 to 6 within period of 15 days from the date of receipt of copy of this order and the authority(s) concerned is/are directed to consider the claim of petitioner expeditiously, preferably within further period of 30 days. 6) With the aforesaid direction, this petition stands disposed. Sd/- (Rakesh Mohan Pandey) JUDGE A j i n k y a