← Library
High Court Of ChhattisgarhWPS/3363/2017disposed off

Smt. Savitri v. State Of Chhattisgarh

2017-07-26Hon'Ble Shri Justice Manindra Mohan Shrivastava2 pages

NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR WPS No.3363 of 2017 • Smt. Savitri W/o Shri Harshu Aged About 68 Years R/o Gudiyayari Power House, Raipur Tahsil And District Raipur Chhattisgarh ---- Petitioner

Versus

1. State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Secretary, Department Of Urban Administration, Mahanadi Bhawan, Mantralaya Naya Raipur, District Raipur (Chhattisgarh).

2. Municipal Corporation Raipur, Through : The Commissioner, Municipal Corporation, Raipur, District Raipur (Chhattisgarh) ---- Respondents For Petitioner :

Shri Hemant Kesharwani, Advocate For Respondent/State :

Ms. Sunita Jain, PL For Respondent/Corporation:

Shri Pankaj Agrawal, Advocate Hon'ble Shri Justice Manindra Mohan Shrivastava Order On Board 26/07/2017 1.

The limited prayer which the Petitioner has sought in the present writ petition is that her initial appointment was on a regular post of 'Safai Kamgar' on 1.1.1977 on which post, she continued till her retirement on 30.6.2011 as such she had continuously worked for a period of 33 years. 2.

Counsel for the Petitioner submits that though the Petitioner has been retired in the year 2011, her claim for pension has not been finalized or settled by the Respondents. According to the Counsel for the Petitioner, she is entitled for pension, but for the reasons best known the Respondents are not processing her case. 3.

The documents enclosed with the present writ petition do not reflect of any representation having been made by the Petitioner. Let the Petitioner make a detailed representation in this regard to the Commissioner, Municipal Corporation, Raipur within four weeks from today and on receipt of the said representation the Commissioner, Municipal Corporation, Raipur is directed to ensure that the

representation is decided at the earliest preferably within a period of 60 days from the date of receipt of the said representation. It is further directed that in case, if the Commissioner, Municipal Corporation, Raipur finds that the Petitioner is entitled for pension, the same shall be ordered to be released forthwith and in case if she is not found entitled she should be intimated in writing giving specific reasons as to why she is not entitled for the same.

4.

With the aforesaid direction, the present writ petition stands finally disposed of. SD/- (Manindra Mohan Shrivastava) Judge Tumane