Nand Kumar Sahu v. State Of Chhattisgarh And ORS.

NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR Writ Petition (S) No.4007 of 2014 Nand Kumar Sahu S/o Late Shri Ram Dayal Sahu, aged 63 years, Resident of village-Basaha, Tahsil - Seepat, P.S. Seepat, Post-Beltara, District - Bilaspur (Chhattisgarh) ----Petitioner

Versus

1. State of Chhattisgarh Through the Secretary, Department of Infrastructure Development Corporation, Mahanadi Bhawan, New Mantralay, Raipur (CG)

2. Managing Director, Department of Chhattisgarh Infrastructure Development Corporation, Mahanadi Bhawan, New Mantralay Raipur (CG)

3. Divisional Manager, Department of Chhattisgarh Infrastructure Development Corporation (Transport Department) Aamanaka, District-Raipur (CG)

4. Assistant Commissioner, office of the Regional Provident Fund, Pandari, District-Raipur (CG) ---- Respondents For Petitioner : Mr.Sunil Tripathi, Advocate For Respondent No.1 : Mr.Animesh Tiwari, Dy.A.G. For Res.No.2 and 3 : Mr.Prateek Sharma, Advocate For Respondent No.4 : Mr.Sunil Pillai, Advocate Hon'ble Shri Justice Sanjay K. Agrawal Order on Board 05.10.2021

1. Mr.Sunil Tripathi, learned counsel for the petitioner, would submit that after filing of this writ petition, by order dated 13.12.2016 only meager amount of pension of ₹1000/- is being paid and ₹50,000/- has been unauthorizedly deducted from arrears of pension, which the petitioner is otherwise entitled and he is also entitled for higher pension, which has not been paid to him, therefore, he may be allowed to make a representation to respondent No.4, which may be directed

to take a call on the said representation within a shortest possible time as the petitioner is unable to maintain himself and his family by meager amount of pension of ₹1000/-.

2. Mr.Sunil Pillai, learned counsel for respondent No.4, would submit that if such a representation is made, that will be considered and decided expeditiously.

3. Be that as it may, the petitioner is allowed to make a representation within 30 days from today highlighting his grievances regarding meager amount of pension, unauthorized deduction, higher amount of pension, etc. If such a representation made, respondent No.4 shall consider and decide the same within next 30 days from the date of receipt of the representation and pass a reasoned and speaking order, strictly in accordance with law. It is made clear that this Court has not expressed any opinion on merits of the matter.

4. With the aforesaid observation / direction, the writ petition finally stands disposed of. No order as to cost(s).

Sd/- (Sanjay K.Agrawal) Judge B/-