1 / 3 2026:CGHC:848 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPS No. 17 of 2026 • K. Jairao S/o K. Rajaiah Aged About 63 Years (Retired Sweeper), R/o Hospital Sector Bhilai, District -Durg (C.G.) ... Petitioner versus 1. State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Secretary, Department Of Urban, Administration Mahanadi Bhawan, Mantralaya, Atal Nagar, Nawa Raipur, District- Raipur (C.G.) 2. Director Directorate, Urban Administration Department, Indrawati Bhawan, Mantralaya, Atal Nagar, Nawa Raipur, District- Raipur (C.G.) , 3. Deputy Director Pension, Urban Administration Department, Indrawati Bhawan, Mantralaya, New Raipur, District- Raipur (C.G.) , 4. Commissioner, Municipal Corporation Durg, District- Durg (C.G.) ... Respondents For Petitioner : Mr. Praveen Dhurandhar, Advocate For Respondent-State For Respondent No. 4 : : Ms. Smita Jha, Panel Lawyer Mr. Dheeraj Wankhede, Advocate Hon'ble Shri Parth Prateem Sahu, Judge ORDER ON BOARD 07/01/2026 1. Petitioner has filed this writ petition seeking following reliefs. “10.1 That, the Hon’ble Court be pleased to direct the respondent authorities to make payment of gratuity amount to the petitioner for the service, he rendered as Daily Wager. 10.2 That, the Hon’ble Court be pleased to direct the respondent authorities to decide the claim of petitioner, which is pending before the respondents in way of representation dated 30.12.2024 (Annexure P-3). PAWAN KUMAR JHA Digitally signed by PAWAN KUMAR JHA 2 / 3 10.3 That, the Hon’ble Court be pleased to direct the respondent authorities to release the gratuity amount calculated by the respondent department. 10.4 That, this Hon’ble Court may kindly be pleased to grant any other relief, as it may deems fit and appropriate.” 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is pressing this writ petition only with respect to the relief claimed on gratuity and not with respect to the pension. He submits that the petitioner may be permitted to submit a representation in light of the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Netram Sahu Vs. State of Chhattisgarh reported in (2018) 5 SCC 430 and the concerned authority be directed to take decision on the representation to be submitted by the petitioner within the specified time frame. 3. On the other hand, learned counsel for the respondents/State submits that as the petitioner is not pressing this writ petition on merits and is only seeking a direction to submit a representation in light of the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Netram Sahu (supra), towards claim of gratuity, she is having no objection. She however, submits that the case of Netram Sahu (supra) is referred to larger bench of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Dhansai Sahu Vs. State of Chhattisgarh & Ors (2020) 19 SCC 808. 4. Learned counsel for petitioner submits that according to his information, case of Dhansai Sahu (supra) is pending consideration. 5. I have heard learned counsel for the respective parties and perused the documents placed on record. 6. Taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of the case, nature of grievance raised, submission of counsel for the respective parties, the writ petition is disposed of at this stage, permitting petitioner to submit fresh representation before the Respondents No. 2 & 4 raising all the grounds as raised in this writ petition with respect to gratuity. In the event petitioner 3 / 3 submits representation, concerned authority shall consider and decide the same in accordance with law expeditiously, preferably within a further period of 06 months from the date of receipt of the representation. 7. Accordingly, this writ petition stands disposed of with the aforesaid observation and direction. Sd/- (Parth Prateem Sahu) pwn JUDGE