High Court Of ChhattisgarhWPS/5097/2017disposed off

L.K. Ladiya v. State Of Chhattisgarh

2017-09-26Hon'Ble Shri Justice Manindra Mohan Shrivastava2 pages

NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR WPS No. 5097 of 2017 L.K. Ladiya S/o Late Shri Bhagwati Pasad, Aged About 62 Years Retired Government Employee As Assistant Engineer / Sub Divisional Officer, Jonk Canal Water Resources Sub Division, Girod, Distt. Baloda Bazar- Bhatapara Chhattisgarh R/o N V C 21, Narmada Vihar, Yadunandan Nagar, Tifra, Tah & Distt, Bilaspur Civil & Revenue Distt. Bilaspur Chhattisgarh. ---- Petitioner

Versus

1. State Of Chhattisgarh Through Secretary, Water Resources Department, Mahanadi Bhawan, New Raipur, Chhattisgarh.

2. Engineer In Chief, Water Resources Department, Sihawa Bhawan, Civil Line, Raipur Chhattisgarh.

3. Chief Engineer, Mahanadi And Godawari Kachhar, Water Resources Department, Raipur Chhattisgarh.

4. Executive Engineer, Water Resources Construction Division, Kasdol, Distt. Baloda Bazar- Bhatapara (Chhattisgarh)

5. Joint Director, Pension Branch, Ghadi Chouk, Raipur, District Raipur, Chhattisgarh ---- Respondents For Petitioner :

Mr. M.K. Sinha, Advocate For Respondent/State :

Mr. S.P. Kale, Dy. A.G., on advance copy Hon'ble Shri Justice Manindra Mohan Shrivastava Order On Board 26/09/2017 Heard.

1. The petitioner's grievance as ventilated through this petition is that though the petitioner has retired on 30.06.2017, even after lapse of more than 2 1⁄2 months, he has not been paid a single penny. It is submitted that even provisional pension has not been started, pension case has not been

finalized, GPF, gratuity have not been paid.

2. After going through the document on record, it is found that various notices have issued, NOC in favour of the petitioner, order dated 23.06.2017 of the Executive Engineer shows that no departmental enquiry, criminal case or any case of Government recovery is pending against the petitioner. It appears that as no payments have been released, the petitioner has filed this petition.

3. Considering that the petitioner retired only 2 1⁄2 months before, instead of keeping this matter pending, it would be expedient in the interest of justice to dispose off this petition, at this stage, with a direction to the respondents to expedite the finalization of pension case and release all the dues to the petitioner as early as possible.

4. In case, the petitioner does not receive the pensionary benefits with a reasonable period of four months, it would be open for the petitioner to revive this petition.

5. The petition is accordingly disposed off.

Sd/- (Manindra Mohan Shrivastava) Judge Rekha