Disposed

Lalit Dubey and Ors. v. Municipal Council Raigarh and Ors.

Chhattisgarh HC1 Jul 2008WP/1375/1999

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

High Court disposed of a writ petition concerning the regularization and back wages of municipal employees. With party consent, liberty was granted to the irregularized petitioner to file a representation before the authority for arrears.

What did the court decide?

Petition disposed with liberty to petitioners to file representation for contract payment of wages before authority in accordance with law.

Lalit Dubey and Ors. Vs Municipal… — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Chhattisgarh HC (2008)

¶1

¶2

' HIGH COURT OF CIH-IAT'I‘ISGARH AT BILASPUR

¶3

Writ Petition No. 1375 of1999

¶4

PETITxolggks 1 Lalit Dubey, S/o Late Shri Radheshyam Dubey aged about 35 years workmg as Peon, Mumcipal Couacll,^f Ralgarh (MP) (Now (,G) 2 Hemendra Smgh Thakur, S/o Shn Pratap Smgh Thakur aged ahout 30 years woxkmg as Pearl Mummpal Counml Ralgarh (MP) 3 Tejram S/o Late Shn Jaypal aged about 28 years, ‘Municipal I working as»^‘Pump Coolie, Council, Raigarh (MP);

¶5

VERSUS

¶6

RESPONDENTS 1 Mummpal Counml Ralgarh, Through (Juef Mummpalr Ofmer Municipal Council Ralgarh (MP) 2 The Chamnan Mummpal Councll Rmgarh{MP). (WRIT^{PETITION UNDER ARTICLE226/227OFTHE CONSTITUTION OF EIDIA)} (SB: Hon'ble Mn Satish K. Agnihotri, J.) Present : SmL Hamida Siddique, Advocate for the petmonars ‘ Shn B D Guru, Advocata for the respondents

¶7

ORAL ORDER

¶8

(Passed^{on13dayofJubY,2098)}

¶9

With the consent of the parties, the matter is taken up for hearing

¶10

flmaiy.

¶11

. Learned oounsei appearing for the petitioners submits that during ' pnedency of tish. case, all the petitioners have been reguiarized. The pitioetner No. 2 and 3 namely Hemendra SinghThakur and Tejram have also been paid even arrears of wages on the basis of grant of / reuaglr pay secal, but the petitioner No. l i.e. Lalit Dubey has been paid r backwages only for a period of five years. She furthersubmits that the“ respodennts have filed an aifrdavit to this e§eet that the petitioners , have been regularized by order dated 07.12.2002 w.e.f. 22.04.1999 (Annerexu^D/1 ) .

¶12

‘\

¶13

gé

¶14

. So fa: as, grant of backwages to petitioner No. l lie. Lalit Dubey is concerned, the petitioner may make a representation before the

¶15

concerned authonty mdwatmg that other petitioners have been granted backwages as submitted by learned counsel appeanng for the

¶16

petmoners.

¶17

In View of the foregomg nothing sumves in tins mawer However

¶18

liberty is reserved to the pehnoner No 1 to make a representauon for

¶19

grant^of bankwages m accordance With law

¶20

For the reasons mentioned hetemabove the petmon stands disposed of _

¶21

4m wxth the abovestated liberty No order asto costs

¶22

wi
Sdl-
Satish K. Agnihotri
,Ju§9¢

¶23

Sahu

Lalit Dubey and Ors. v. Municipal Council Raigarh and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Lalit Dubey and Ors. v. Municipal Council Raigarh and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Hemlal Sinha Vs State of M.P. and Ors.

Rajkumar Pandey Vs Chairman Cum M.D.Secl.and Ors.

Smt. Vijaya Ottalwar Vs State of Chhattisgarh and Others

Smt.Pratima Dubey Vs the State of M.P. and Ors.

Shatrughan Das Vaishnav Vs State of C.G. and Ors.

Mahtru Vs State of Chhattisgarh and Ors.