High Court Of ChhattisgarhWPS/2755/2017disposed off

Nakul Ram Sahu v. State Of Chhattisgarh

2017-06-30Hon'Ble Shri Justice P. Sam Koshy2 pages

NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR WPS No. 2755 of 2017

1. Nakul Ram Sahu S/o Dayaluram Sahu Aged About 67 Years R/o Village Borda, Post Bhothidih, Police Station Magarlod, District Dhamtari, Chhattisgarh.

2. Bisali Ram Sahu S/o Palturam Sahu Aged About 63 Years R/o VillageKhairjhitti, Post Giraud, Police Station Magarlod, District Dhamtari, Chhattisgarh.

---- Petitioners

Versus

1. State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Secretary, Public Works Department, Mantralaya, New Raipur, District Raipur, Chhattisgarh.

2. The Executive Engineer, Public Works Department, Dhamtari, District Dhamtari, Chhattisgarh.

3. The Sub-Divisional Officer, Public Works Department, Sub-Division Paraswani ( Magarlod ), District- Dhamtari, Chhattisgarh.

4. The District Treasury And Pension Department, District Dhamtari, Chhattisgarh.

---- Respondents For Petitioners : Mr. Goutam Khetrapal, Advocate For State : Mr. S.P. Kale, Dy. A.G.

Hon'ble Shri Justice P. Sam Koshy Order On Board 30/06/2017 Heard.

1. The petitioners in the present writ petition have sought for direction to respondents for considering the case for grant of pension taking into account the services that they had rendered prior to regularization under the Chhattisgarh (Work Charged and Contingency Paid Employees) Pension Rules, 1979 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Pension Rules, 1979').

2. Learned counsel for the petitioners relied upon the judgment of the

Division Bench of this Court in Writ Appeal No.1073 of 2012 and other analogous writ appeals decided on 26.02.2015. It is further contended that the said judgment of the Division Bench has also been affirmed by the Supreme Court whereby SLP of the State Government has been dismissed.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the petitioners, herein, rendered more than 25-30 years of services with the respondents and at the fag end of the petitioners' services, they were regularized. The petitioners in the present writ petition have been regularized in service and rendered their services as a regular employee as is required under the Pension Rules,1979. The petitioners, in this petition, before the Court claims that their case being similarly situated as per the order dated 26.02.2015 passed by this Court in Writ Appeal No.1073 of 2012, therefore, the same benefit may also be extended by the respondentState to them in the same manner as has been directed by this Court.

4. The State counsel does not oppose the factual matrix of the case and submits that the matter is similar to the judgment passed by the Division Bench of this Court and the matter may be disposed off on similar terms.

5. Accordingly, the present writ petition stands disposed off with the direction to the respondents to consider the case of the petitioners in the light of the judgment of the Division Bench of this Court passed in Writ Appeal No.1073 of 2012 dated 26.02.2015. In the event, if the factual matrix of the petitioners' case being identical to the appellants in the writ appeal, the petitioners also be extended the similar relief at the earliest preferably within a period of 90 days from the date of receipt of copy of this order.

Sd/- (P.Sam Koshy) J U D G E Rekha