1 2026:CGHC:14230 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPS No. 2562 of 2021 Kisun S/o Late Shri Ramlal Aged About 60 Years R/o Village-Jaroud, Post Farfoud, Tahsil And Police Station- Aarang, District- Raipur, Chhattisgarh. Permanent Gangman Sub Divisional Officer, Public Works, Survey Division, Raipur, Chhattisgarh. ... Petitioner versus 1 - State of Chhattisgarh, through The Secretary, Public Works Department, Mahanadi Bhawan, Naya Raipur, District- Raipur, Chhattisgarh. 2 - The Superintending Engineer Public Work Department, Raipur, District- Raipur, Chhattisgarh. 3 - The Executive Engineer Public Works Department,division- I, Raipur, District- Raipur,chhattisgarh. 4 - The Sub-Divisional Officer Public Works Department, Survey Sub- Division, Raipur, District- Raipur,chhattisgarh., District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh ... Respondent(s) For Petitioner : Mr. T. R. Chandrakar, Advocate, on behalf of Mr. V. K. Pandey, Advocate For State : Mr. Suyashdhar Badgaiyya, Government Advocate Hon’ble Shri Justice Rakesh Mohan Pandey Order on Board 25/03/2026 Digitally signed by NADIM MOHLE 2 1. The petitioner has filed this petition seeking the following relief(s):- “10.1. This Hon’ble Court may kindly be pleased to issue notices to the respondents returnable within early date of hearing. 10.2. This Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to set-aside the impugned order/notice Annexure P- 1 dated 17.02.2021, passed by the respondent no. 4. 10.3. This Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to issue a writ of mandamus, directing the respondents to retire the present petitioner on the basis of the correct date of birth i.e. 01.08.1961 w.e.f. 01.08.2023 with all consequential benefits. 10.4. grant 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. 10.5. Cost of the petition. 2. Mr. Chandrakar, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner’s date of birth is 01.08.1961, and thus, date of retirement from services should be 01.08.2023; however, he was forced to retire on 30.04.2021. 3. On the other hand, Mr. Badgaiyya, learned State counsel would submit that the petitioner’s claim has been accepted by the department, and his date of retirement was fixed by treating his date of birth as 01.08.1961. He would further submit that the petitioner retired from service on 01.08.2023; thus, the grievance of the petitioner has already been redressed. 3 4. Taking into consideration the facts discussed above, this petition is dismissed as having been rendered infructuous, as the grievance of the petitioner has already been redressed. 5. No order as to cost(s). Sd/- Rakesh Mohan Pandey JUDGE Nadim