CGHC010334912026 2026:CGHC:41193 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPS No. 6466 of 2026 1 - Smt. Yogita Chadhar W/o Late Chandrashekhar Chadhar, Aged About 52 Years R/o Tilak Ward Balod, District Balod (C.G.) ... Petitioner versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Department Of School Education, Mantralaya, Mahanadi Bhawan, Atal Nagar, Nawa Raipur, District Raipur (C.G.) 2 - The Collector, District Balod (C.G.) 3 - District Education Officer, Balod, District Balod (C.G.) 4 - Block Education Officer, Balod, District Balod (C.G.) . Respondents For Petitioner : Mr. Swapnil Keshari, Advocate. For Respondents/State : Mr. Suyashdhar Badgaiyan, G.A. with Mr. Soumitra Kesharwani, Panel Lawyer Hon’ble Shri Bibhu Datta Guru, Judge Order on Board 22/09/2026 1. By the present petition, the petitioner has prayed for following reliefs:- 10.1 The Hon'ble court may kindly be pleased to direct the Respondents to pay gratuity amount with interest as awarded by controlling authorities AMARDEEP CHOUBEY Digitally signed by AMARDEEP CHOUBEY Date: 2026.09.22 17:50:11 +0530 10.2 The Hon'ble court may kindly be pleased to direct the Respondent 02 to recover gratuity amount as per award dated 26.12.2025 passed by controlling authority from respondents. 2. Learned counsel for petitioner submits that petitioner has filed an application for disbursement of amount of gratuity for which she is entitled before the controlling authority under the Payment of Gratuity Act, 1972. The application submitted by petitioner was allowed by competent authority. Even after passing of order of awarding gratuity in favor of petitioner, when the amount of gratuity is not paid she has filed an application for execution of order. The competent authority under the Act of 1972 while considering the application filed under Section 8 of the Act of 1972 had issued a letter to the concerned authority for recovery amount of gratuity from the non-applicant therein by attaching property of non-applicant, however, till date the authority concerned has not complied with the directives of controlling authority under the Act of 1972. 3. Learned counsel for State submits that pursuant to the order of this Court, the Collector, Balod filed her affidavit on 14/09/2026 wherein the Collector has assured the Court that the recovery proceedings be put to its logical end at the earliest in accordance with law. 4. On due consideration of submission made by learned counsel for parties, particularly considering the affidavit submitted by the Collector, Balod, instead of keeping this writ petition pending, I find it appropriate to dispose of the same at this stage, directing respondent authorities to conclude the proceedings of recovery expeditiously, preferably within a further period of three months from the date of receipt of the order, if there is no legal impediment to comply with the order of controlling authority under the Act of 1972. 5. With the aforementioned observation and direction, this writ petition is disposed of. SD/- (Bibhu Datta Guru) Judge Gowri/ Amardeep