Smt. Kunti Sharma v. State Of Chhattisgarh

NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR Writ Petition (S) No. 4665 of 2016 Smt. Kunti Sharma, W/o Late Shri Shail Kumar Sharma, aged about 63 years, Resident of Shiv Mandir Ward, Mahadevghat, Jagdalpur, P.S. Kotwali, District Jagdalpur (C.G.) ---- Petitioner

Versus

1.

State of Chhattisgarh, through : Secretary, Home Affairs, Police Department, Mahanadi Bhawan, New Mantralaya, District - Raipur (C.G.) 2.

The Director General of Police, Police Head Quarter, District Raipur (C.G.) 3.

The Additional Inspector General of Police, Bastar Range, Jagdalpur, District Jagdalpur - Bastar (C.G.) 4.

The Superintendent of Police, Jagdalpur, District - Jagdalpur - Bastar (C.G.) --- Respondents ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- For Petitioner :

: Shri Prakash Tiwari, Advocate.

For Respondents/State : Shri Dhiraj Wankhede, G.A.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Hon'ble Shri Justice Sanjay K. Agrawal Order On Board 20/10/2016 (1) Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner is entitled for family pension on account of death of her husband- Shri Shail Kumar Sharma. He further submits that though the representation had been filed by the petitioner before respondent No.1 but as the same has not been decided till now, he may be permitted to file fresh representation before respondent No. 1 for redressal of her grievances and the same may be directed to be decided within the specific time frame. To which, counsel for the State has no objection.

(3) Prayer appears to be fair and reasonable.

(4) Be that as it may, if the petitioner makes fresh representation along with supporting documents within a period of three weeks from today before the respondent No.1, the same shall be considered and decided

by the authority concerned within a period of three months from the date of receipt of representation.

(5) With the aforesaid observations, the writ petition stands finally disposed of.

(6) It is made clear that this Court has not expressed any opinion on the merits of the case and the authority concerned shall decide the representation in accordance with law on its own merits. Sd/- (Sanjay K. Agrawal) Judge D/-