Ram Sarowar Mishra v. State Of Chhattisgarh

NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR Writ Petition (S) No.5642 of 2016 Ram Sarowar Mishra, son of Shri Jagannath Mishra, aged about 63 years, resident of Sidhi, Tahsil & District Shahdol (M.P.). ---- Petitioner

Versus

1.

State of Chhattisgarh, through the Secretary, Water Resources Department, Mahanadi Bhawan, New Raipur, P.S. Rakhi, District Raipur (CG).

2.

The Superintending, Irrigation Division, Ambikapur, District Surguja (CG).

3.

The Sub-Divisional Officer, Water Resources Division, Baikunthpur, District Korea (CG).

4.

The Executive Engineer, Water Resources Division, Baikunthpur, District Korea (CG).

5.

The Joint Director, Treasury, Account & Pension, Ambikapur, District Surguja (CG).

--- Respondents For Petitioner : Shri Anil Tripathi, Advocate For Respondents : Shri Dhiraj Wankhede, Govt. Advocate Hon'ble Shri Justice Sanjay K. Agrawal Order On Board 17/10/2016 (1) Heard.

(2) The petitioner has filed this petition seeking issuance of direction for consideration of his application for grant of pension. (3) Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that in view of the order of the Division Bench passed on 26.02.2015 in W.A. No.

281/2013 (Lakhanram Sahu and ors. Vs. State of Chhattisgfarh and ors.) and batch of appeals, the period of services rendered by the petitioner after completion of five years of contingency service are required to be treated as temporary and consequently for pension purposes. He submits that otherwise also, as the petitioner had completed more than six years of service after his regular appointment, he is entitled to pension in view of provisions contained in Pension Rules, 1979.

(4) Learned State counsel submits that though there is no quarrel with the legal proposition in the judgments of this Court, whether the petitioner is entitled to the benefit, would depend upon whether the petitioner is similarly situated and verification of facts with regard to date of appointment, regular appointment and date of retirement. (5) Considering the submission, this petition is disposed off with a direction to the respondents to consider petitioner's case in the light of order dated 26.02.2011 passed in W.A. No.281/2013 and batch of petitions and upon verification of facts, if it is found that the petitioner is similarly situated, same benefit shall be extended to the petitioner in accordance with law.

(6) Considering that the petitioner has already retired as contingency employee, it is directed that decision should be taken within an outer limit of three months from the date of receipt of copy of this order.

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