Disposed

Kunjram Bharadwaj v. State Of C.g. and Ors.

Chhattisgarh HC9 Oct 2013WPS/2374/2013

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This petition was dismissed. The Court held the case covered by Bablnath Mandal, directing the Advocate General to send the matter to the pension committee within 15 days for consideration and to accord hearing within three months, with liberty to move a fresh W.P. if dissatisfied.

What did the court decide?

To forward the case to the Pension Committee within 15 days for consideration of retirement dues.

Kunjram Bharadwaj Vs State Of C.g. and… — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Chhattisgarh HC (2013)

-\ 66

IN THE HONTBLE HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR (C.G.)

¶5

Writ Petition (S) Tio.VI^ of 2013

¶6

PETITIONER

¶7

[< h^.l^'r't)^ -^^t ^ 0^^' ^^^w '.'L.tsw-- "'*'" l'i ^.pres',e"W

¶8

Oated--'""

¶9

Kunjram Bharadwajson of Shri Sadhram Bharadwaj, aged about 62 Retired Headmaster, Vidya years, Mandir Andi, Post-Kirari, Tahsil & Police "gtadon-Malkharod, CivU & Revenue District-JanJgir-Champa (C.G.)

¶10

VERSUS

¶11

RESPONDENTS :1.

¶12

State of Chhattisgarh, Through the Secretary, Department of School Education, New Raipur,

¶13

P.S.-Rakhi, District-Raipur (C.G.)

¶14

¶15

The Director Public Instructions, Pension Bada Raipur, DistrictRaipur (C.G.)

¶16

¶17

Joint Du-ector, Treasury, Accounts 8s Pension, Bilaspur Division,

¶18

Bilaspur (C.G.)

¶19

¶20

District Education Officer, JanjgirChampa, District-Janjgir-Champa (C.G.)

¶21

PETITION.UNDER ARTICLE 226' OF_THE CONSTITUTION INDIA

¶22

PARTICULARS OFfHE PETITIONER :-

¶23

As stated above in cause title.

¶24

PARTICULARS OF THE RESPONDENTS :-

¶25

^ T^

¶26

HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH : BILASPUR

¶27

Writ Petition (S) No.2374 of 2013

PETITIONER

Kunjram Bharadwaj

Versus

RESPONDENTS

State of Chhattisgarh & Others

¶33

Single Bench : Hon'ble Shri Justice Prashant Kumar h/Iishra

¶34

Present:Ms. Pushpa Dwivedi, Advocate for the petitioner. Shri P.K. Bhaduri, Panel Lawyerforthe State.

¶35

ORAL ORDER

¶36

(Passed on this 9th day of October, 2013)

¶37

Heard learned counsel for the parties.

¶38

Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that the case being payment of retiral benefits, the same may be referred to the pension committee.

¶39

This Court, in the matter of W.P. No. 4642/2004 (Baijnath Mandal v. The Stete of Chhattisgarh & Others) and other connected matters, directed the Committee to consider the matter of retiral dues as the disputed question of facts were involved. The Committee was constituted by the State Government, pursuant to the order dated 19/06/2006 passed in W.P. No. 1961/2006 (Smt. Keja Bai Chandrakar Vs. State Govemment and Others) and order dated 13/03/2008 passed in M.C.C. No. 105 of 2008 (State of Chhattisgarh 8, Others V. Baijnath Mandal and anothei). Thus, this petition is squarely covered by the judgment and order dated 31st of January, 2008 passed in W.P. No.4642/2004 Baijnath Mandal (supra) as subrnitte,d':.' by learned counsel appearing for the parties. y

¶40

This petition is accordingly disposed of in the same terms i.e. the office of the Advocate General is directed to send the case to the Committee, \ within a period of 15 days from the date of receipt of a copy of the

¶41

''^S'
ifij'/'^!"ssi.* °6
t£? VSSSaS%^lsifiii^."T"J Sj8
. '^s^y.'s's^''"' v"y

¶42

¶43

petition from the petitioner and this order. Thereafter, the Committee shall issue notice to the petitioner and the officers concerned, within a further period of 15 days. The Committee shall consider and pass order, in accordance with law, after affording proper opportunity of hearing to the parties. The petitioner and the officers concerned may file additional documents, if necessary. The entire exercise, including payment of retiral dues, if any, to the petitioner be completed within a period of three months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.

¶44

The petitioner shall supply extra copy of the petition to the learned counsel appearing for the State/respondents for forwarding the same to the Committee.

¶45

Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that liberty may be reserved in favour of the petitioner to move fresh writ petition if the decision made by the committee on anyone of the claim including claim for interest is decided against the petitioner.

¶46

Liberty as prayed for is granted. It is made clear that the Committee shall consider the aspect as to whether the school from where the petitioner has retired, being a fully aided school, is covered for according pensionary benefits.

¶47

Accordingly, writ petition stands disposed of.

¶48

t^(va
»s^ftt^A^
^t

¶49

Kunjram Bharadwaj v. State Of C.g. and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Kunjram Bharadwaj v. State Of C.g. and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Shivshanker Prasad Jaiswal Vs State of Chhattisgarh and Ors.

J.S.Gaikwad Vs State of Chhattisgarh and Ors.

Smt. Usha Bhasker Vs State Of C.g. and Ors.

Umesh Agrawal Vs State of Chhattisgarh and Ors.

Dorilal Sharma Vs State Of Chhattisgarh And Ors.

Sanjeev Kumar Tripathi Vs C.G.Infrastructure Dev.Corp.and Anr.