1 2026:CGHC:992 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPS No. 734 of 2017 1 - Malti Devi Chourasia (Died And Deleted) Through Lrs As Per Honble Court Order Dated 12-12-2024 1.1 - Vikas Kumar Chourasia S/o Late Shri P.L. Chourasia Aged About 43 Years R/o Smig - A14, Parijat Extension Nehru Nagar Bilaspur District- Bilaspur Chhattisgarh 1.2 - Vishal Kumar Chourasia S/o Late Shir P.L. Chourasia Aged About 38 Years R/o Smig - A14, Parijat Extension Nehru Nagar Bilaspur District- Bilaspur Chhattisgarh ... Petitioner(s) versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through Secretary, Public Works Department, Mahanadi Bhawan, Mantralaya New Raipur, District Raipur Chhattisgarh., Chhattisgarh 2 - Executive Engineer, Public Work Department Bilaspur Division - 1, Bilaspur Chhattisgarh., District : Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh ... Respondent(s) For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Vinod Kumar Sharma with Mr. G. P. Mathur, Advocate For Respondent(s) : Mr. Vedant Shadangi, PL Hon'ble Shri Justice Sachin Singh Rajput Order On Board 07.01.2026 1. The petitioners have filed this writ petition seeking for the following relief(s); “i) That, this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to direct the respondent to pay the amount of gratuity to the widow of the deceased employee i.e. petitioner alongwith 18%, in the interest of justice. (ii) That, this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to quash letter Annexure P-2, in the interest of justice. (ii) Any other relief which may be suitable in the facts and circumstances of the case, may also be granted.” HIFZURRAHMAN ANSARI Digitally signed by HIFZURRAHMAN ANSARI Date: 2026.01.08 17:08:22 +0530 2 2. The present writ petition was filed by Smt. Malti Devi Chourasia, wife of Late Shri P.L. Chourasia who was working as a Sub-Engineer under the respondents and died in harness on 28.01.2004. During the pendency of the writ petition, the original petitioner Smt. Malti Devi Chourasia has passed away and her legal heirs have been duly brought on record. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the deceased employee was entitled to receive retiral dues including gratuity amounting to Rs.2,43,068/-. Vide order dated 09.05.2005 (Annexure P/1) only 50% of the gratuity amount was sanctioned and paid to the original petitioner. He subimits that the remaining amount of gratuity was withheld without passing any order of recovery or initiating any departmental proceedings. Hence, the present writ petition has been filed. 4. A return has been filed on behalf of the respondents. Learned counsel for the respondents submits that during the periods from 10.10.1979 to 08.11.1985 and from 15.07.1996 to 03.03.1998, the deceased employee while working as Sub-Engineer at Mungeli, had received certain advances and there was a shortage of articles provided to him. On that basis, the said amount was sought to be recovered from the gratuity payable to the deceased employee. 5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record. 6. On the last date of hearing, i.e., 17.02.2025, this Court directed the respondents to place on record whether any recovery order had been passed against the deceased employee and whether any recovery was pending against him. On instructions, Mr. Shadangi, learned counsel for the respondents fairly submitted that no recovery order was ever passed. 7. There is no dispute that Late Shri P.L. Chourasia was working as a Sub- 3 Engineer under the respondents and died in harness. It is also not in dispute that during his lifetime no recovery order was issued against him, nor was any departmental inquiry initiated alleging receipt of excess advance or shortage of articles. Even after his death, no recovery order was passed and other retiral dues have already been paid. The impugned order Annexure P/1 reveals that only 50% of the gratuity amount was sanctioned and paid to the original petitioner. In the absence of any recovery order or departmental inquiry establishing liability of the deceased employee for any alleged loss or advance amounting to Rs.1,21,534/-, the withholding of the remaining 50% gratuity is arbitrary and unsustainable in law. 8. Accordingly, it is directed that the remaining amount of gratuity shall be paid to the petitioners within a period of 60 days from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. 9. Accordingly, the writ petition is allowed. Sd/- (Sachin Singh Rajput) Judge H.Ansari