High Court Of ChhattisgarhWPS/5210/2019disposed off

Tarachand Soni v. State Of Chhattisgarh

2019-07-17Hon'Ble Shri Justice P. Sam Koshy2 pages

NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR Writ Petition (S) No. 5210 of 2019 Tarachand Soni S/o Nandlal Soni, Aged About 73 Years, Sevanivrit Assistant Grame Panchayat Officer, R/o Village Dongariya, Thana And Tehsil Lormi, District Mungeli, Chhattisgarh ---- Petitioner

Versus

1. State Of Chhattisgarh, through Director, Panchayat Sanchanalaya Indrawati Bhawan, Naya Raipur, District Raipur Chhattisgarh

2. Sanchalak, Samaj Kalyan, Sanchanalaya Indrawati Bhawan, Naya Raipur, District Raipur Chhattisgarh

3. Chief Executive Officer, Janpad Panchayat, Lormi, District Mungeli Chhattisgarh

4. Sanyukt Sanchalak Panchayat Bilaspur, District Bilaspur Chhattisgarh

5. Sanyukt Sanchalak Samaj Kalyan Vibhag Bilapsur, District Bilaspur Chhattisgarh

6. Up Sanchalak Samaj Kalyan Viabhag Mungeli District Mungeli Chhattisgarh

7. Sanyukt Sanchalak, Kosh Lekha Avam Pension Bilaspur Chhattisgarh ---- Respondents For Petitioner :

Mr. Rajendra Kumar Patel, Advocate For Respondent/State :

Mr. Jitendra Pali, Dy. A.G.

Hon'ble Shri Justice P. Sam Koshy Order On Board 17/07/2019

1. The limited grievance that the petitioner has in the present writ petition is the inaction on the part of the respondents in not granting the benefit of 2nd Kramonnati that the petitioner was entitled for while he was in service.

2. The petitioner stood retired from service on 30.04.2006. Counsel for the petitioner referred to Annexure P-3 dated 10.08.2015 whereby the Dy. Director of the Department of Social Welfare has issued direction to the Joint Director, Social Welfare, Bilaspur to process the claim of the petitioner deciding whether he is entitled for the benefit of 2nd Kramonnati or not. Though this correspondence was made in August, 2015, till date no decision has been taken by the authority.

3. Given the limited grievance that the petitioner has, this Court is of the opinion that ends of justice would meet if the writ petition is disposed of with a direction to respondents 4 to 6 to scrutinize the claim of the petitioner so far as grant of 2nd Kramonnati is concerned. In case the petitioner is entitled for the same, the relief shall be extended to him forthwith without any further delay. It is expected that the respondents 4 to 6 shall take a decision within an outer limit of 4 months from the date of receipt of copy of this order.

4. The writ petition accordingly stands disposed of. Sd/- (P. Sam Koshy) JUDGE Khatai