Dr. Om Shankar Bajpai v. The State Of Chhattisgarh

NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR Writ Petition (S) No. 6021 of 2018 Dr. Om Shankar Bajpai S/o Late Shri Durga Shankar Bajpai, Aged About 72 Years, R/o Vivekananda Nagar, Street No. 1, Dhamtari District Dhamtari, Chhattisgarh ---- Petitioner

Versus

1. The State Of Chhattisgarh Through Secretary, Department Of Health And Family Welfare, Mahanadi Bhavan, New Raipur, Police Station Rakhi, District Raipur, Chhattisgarh

2. Director, Department Of Health And Family Welfare, Mahanadi Bhavan, New Raipur Police Station, Rakhi, District Raipur, Chhattisgarh

3. Chief District And Medical Officer, Gariyaband, District Gariyaband Chhattisgarh

4. Block Health Officer, Primary Health Center, Fingeshwar, District Gariyaband Chhattisgarh

5. Chief District And Medical Officer, Raipur District - Raipur Chhattisgarh ---- Respondents For Petitioner :

Shri Anand Mohan Tiwari, Advocate For State :

Shri D. Wankhede, Govt. Advocate Hon'ble Shri Justice P. Sam Koshy Order On Board 13.09.2018 The grievance of the petitioner is that though he had retired from service in the year 2004, his retiral dues have not been finalized by the respondents and the pensionary benefits started only in the year 2010. 2.

Counsel for the petitioner submits that there are certain unpaid salary and unpaid retiral dues which are yet to be settled by the respondents for

which the petitioner has made repeated representations to the respondents which till date have not been decided. He further submits that the petitioner has enclosed with his representation all the relevant documents to substantiate his claim and therefore prays that the present writ petition may be disposed of with a direction to the respondents to consider and decide the said representation.

3.

The said limited prayer is not opposed by the State counsel. 4.

Accordingly, the present writ petition stands disposed of with a direction to respondents 2, 3 & 5 to personally scrutinize the claim of the petitioner and pass an appropriate order in accordance with the rules governing the field. In addition to the representation already made, the petitioner would also be at liberty to make a fresh representation immediately. Taking into consideration the fact that the petitioner is aged around more than 72 years, late an appropriate final decision be taken within a period of 45 days from the date of receipt of certified copy of this order.

Sd/- P. Sam Koshy Judge Bhola