Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Chhattisgarh · body

2026 DAILYLAW 13844 (CHH)

RAM LAL KHANDEKAR v. STATE OF CHHATTISGARH

WPS/8428/2025 · 2026-02-23

Shri Parth Prateem Sahu

body2026

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

1 / 3 2026:CGHC:9749 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPS No. 8428 of 2025 Ram Lal Khandekar S/o Late Saheb Lal Khadekar Aged About 73 Years R/o Ward No. 14, Banjari Chowk, Nagar Panchayat Bhatgaon, District - Sarangarh - Bilaigarh (C.G.) ... Petitioner versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through Secretary, Food, Civil Supplies And Consumer Protection Department, Mantralaya, Mahanadi Bhawan, Nava Raipur Atal Nagar, District - Raipur (C.G.) 2 - Director Directorate, Food, Civil Supplies And Consumer Protection Department, Indrawati Bhawan, Nava Raipur Atal Nagar, District - Raipur (C.G.) 3 - Collector Food Branch, Janjgir- Champa, District - Janjgir -Champa (C.G.) 4 - Collector Food Branch, Jashpur District - Jashpur (C.G.) 5 - Food Officer Janjgir - Champa District - Janjgir - Champa (C.G.) 6 - Joint Director Accounts Treasury And Pension Bilaspur District - Bilaspur (C.G.) ... Respondents For Petitioner : Mr. C. Jayant K. Rao, Advocate For Respondents : Mr. Virendra Verma, Panel lawyer ALFIZA BAIG Digitally signed by ALFIZA BAIG Date: 2026.02.25 11:30:53 +0530 2 / 3 S.B.: Hon'ble Shri Parth Prateem Sahu, Judge 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 direct the respondent authorities to finalized the pension case of the petitioner. 10.2 That, this Hon’ble Court may kindly be pleased to direct the respondent authorities to decide the suspension period of the petitioner and further to provide annual increment to the petitioner. 10.3 That, the Hon’ble Court may kindly be pleased to grant any other relief as it may deems fit and appropriate.” 2. Learned counsel for petitioner submits that petitioner while working on the post of Food Inspector got retired from service on 23.07.2012. When the petitioner was working as Food Inspector one departmental inquiry was initiated against him, however, the said departmental inquiry was closed on 27.11.2017 recording that charges are not being proved against the petitioner and further during the pendency of inquiry petitioner got retired from service and since then petitioner’s case of pension is not finalized. Since the date of retirement, petitioner is getting anticipatory pension only. He further submits that from the documents Annexure P-3 it is reflecting that the query has been put as to what order has been passed on the period of suspension of petitioner i.e. from 09.05.2001 to 04.07.2002 and about yearly increments for the period from 01.01.1996 to 01.01.2006. Even after filing of this writ petition, the Assistant Director Treasury Accounts and Pension, Bilaspur wrote letter to Food Officer i.e. respondent no. 3 seeking certain queries however, till date the said queries had not been satisfied by respondent no. 3 to the satisfaction of respondent no. 6 3 / 3 and petitioner is deprived of his right of getting appropriate pension for the services he has rendered till he attained the age of superannuation. 3. Learned counsel for State would submit that reply has been filed to the writ petition with an affidavit of the Food Officer, Janjgir Champa stating that the case of petitioner is forwarded to the officer of the Joint Director, Treasury, Accounts and Pension, Bilaspur vide letter dated 12.12.2023. He further submits that with regard to letter dated 16.01.2026 he is not aware. 4. I have heard learned counsel for respective parties. 5. The case of petitioner is that claim of pension has not been finalized for want of relevant documents and information as sought for by the office of the Treasury Accounts and Pension, Bilaspur from respondent no. 2. The last query which is made by office of Treasury dated 16.01.2026, petitioner has completed about 13 years post retirement period, however till date the dispute of pension has not been decided. There is no dispute with respect to entitlement of petitioner for getting the full pension in the facts of the case. 6. In the aforementioned facts of the case, I find it appropriate to dispose of this writ petition at this stage directing respondent no. 3 to satisfy the query made by respondent no. 6 and direction to concerned authorities to finalize the case of pension as also the annual increment within a further period of six weeks from the date of receipt of the Order. It is ordered accordingly. 7. With the aforementioned direction, this writ petition stands disposed of. Certified copy as per rules. sd/- alfiza (Parth Prateem Sahu) Judge