Rajesh Tiwari v. State Of Chhattisgarh

NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPS No. 6133 of 2018 Rajesh Tiwari S/o Late Murarilal Tiwari, aged about 51 years, Chief Executive Officer, Nagar Panchayat, Baramkela, District Raigarh (C.G.). ---Petitioner

Versus

1. State Of Chhattisgarh, Through The Secretary, Urban Administration Department, Mahanadi Bhavan, Mantralaya, New Raipur, District Raipur (C.G.).

2. Chief Executive Officer, Nagar Panchayat Kirodimal, District Raigarh (C.G.).

---Respondents For petitioner :

Shri Pankaj Agrawal, Advocate.

For State :

Shri S.P.Kale, Dy.A.G.

Hon'ble Shri Justice P. Sam Koshy Order on Board 19/09/2018 1.

The limited grievance of the petitioner in the instant Writ Petition is that, he has not been paid the arrears of the revision of pay with effect from January-2016 to August-2016. The said amount has already been calculated and assessed and it is the respondent No.2 who has to release the said amount as the petitioner was working under the respondent No.2 at the relevant point of time.

2.

The petitioner has been paid the arrears of the revision of pay for the subsequent period from the place where he was subsequently posted. 3.

From the pleadings, there does not appear to be any good reason available for the respondent No.2 to withhold the said arrears.

4.

Given the limited relief sought for, this Court does not intend to keep the Writ Petition pending, rather ends of justice would meet if the Writ Petition is disposed off with a direction to the respondent No.2 to ensure that, the arrears of pay revision for January-2016 to August-2016 is paid to the petitioner forthwith without any delay within a period of 60 days from today. 5.

In case, if the amount is not released within 60 days, then the said amount shall also carry interest @ 10% from January-2016 till the actual date of payment. It shall be the responsibility of the petitioner to bring the order of this Court to the notice of respondents 2. However in case he is not entitled for the same he should be immediately intimated of the reasons why it would not be payable to him.

6.

The Writ Petition accordingly stands disposed off. Sd/- (P. Sam Koshy) Sumit JUDGE