Disposed

Anwar Baig Mirza v. State of Chhattisgarh and Ors.

Chhattisgarh HC3 Dec 2013WPS/392/2007

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Single Bench of the High Court of Chhattisgarh dismissed a writ petition regarding retirement benefits by referring the matter to the State Government's pension committee, granting liberty to file fresh writs if necessary.

What did the court decide?

Writ petition disposed of by directing the Advocate General to send the case to the Pension Committee within 15 days for consideration.

Anwar Baig Mirza Vs State of… — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Chhattisgarh HC (2013)

gh m.“

CILAta’aL/

1N THE HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR

¶5

WRIT PETITION (S)^No. g 9^L [2007

¶6

W'Anwar Baig Mirza, aged about 7O years,^{S/oSalamBaig,R/o} Champa (Mazidpara),^WardNo.3 Post Office, Champa, Distt. Janjgir Champa

¶7

PETITIONER
,a
7U
(é”
r/i.
RESPONDENTS

¶8

VERSUS

¶9

Th6 State of Chhattisgarh through Secretary, Revenue^Department, D.K.S. Bhawan, Raipur (C‘GJ

¶10

The Collector, Bilaspur (C.G.)

Deputy Director,

Treasure and Accounts, Bilaspur EXecutive Engineer, Machadolh', Hasdeo Banga Bandh Vibhag, NO. 3, Machadoli, Distt. Korba (co) The State of Madhya Pradesh,

¶15

through Secretary, Revenue Department, Vallabh Bhawan, Bhopal (M.P.]

¶16

¶17

The Collector, Chhindwara (M.P) Deputy Director Treasure and Accounts, Chhindwara 1MP)

¶18

¶19

WRIT PETITION UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA

¶20

Particular of the Petitioner :-

¶21

As mentioned above in the cause title.

¶22

3 e

¶23

¶24

HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH BILASPUR SINGLE BENCH : HON’BLE SHRI PRASHANT KUMAR MISHRA. J.

¶25

WP. (S)^No.392of2007

¶26

PETITIONER Anwar Baig Mirza

¶27

Versus

¶28

RESPONDENTS The State of Chhattisgarh and others.

¶29

Shri Parag Kotecha, counsel for petitioner. Shri Ajay Dwivedi, Dy. Govt. Advocate for the State.

¶30

ORAL ORDER (03/1^212013)

¶31

Heard teamed counsel for the parties.

¶32

Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that the case being payment^{ofretiraibenefitsmatter,maybereferredtothe} pension committee.

¶33

This Court, in the matter of W.P. No. 4642/2004 (Baijnath Manda! v. The State of Chhattisgarh & Others) and other connected matters. directed the Committee to consider the matter'of retirai dues as the disputed question of facts were invoived. 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 Government and Others) and or'der dated 13/03/2008 passed in M.C.C. No. 105 of 2008 (State of Chhattisgarh & Others V. Baljnath Mandel and another) Thus this petition is squarely covered by the judgment and order dated 315‘ of January, 2008 passed m W P No 4642/2004 Baynath Man,da/ (supra) as submitted by learned counsel appearing for the parties 4. 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 Vi I of 15 days from the date of receipt of a copy of the petition from the petitioner and i ‘^" 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.

¶34

. a < 5. 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.

¶35

Q
3

¶36

Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that liberty may be reserved in favour of the petitioner^{tomovefreshwrit} petition if the decision made by the committee on anyone of the claim including claim for interest is decided against the petitioner.

¶37

Liberty as prayed for is granted.

¶38

Accordingly, writ petition stands disposed of.

¶39

Sd//—
Prashant Kumar Mishra
Judge

Anwar Baig Mirza v. State of Chhattisgarh and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Anwar Baig Mirza v. State of Chhattisgarh 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

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Sukhi Ram Vs Gangaram and Others

Santosh Kumar Sahu Vs State of Chhattisgarh and Ors.

Kartik Ram Bhendiya Vs Director,Cg.Rajya Krishi Vip.BOARDandORS

Ashish Shrivas and Ors. Vs State of Chhattisgarh and Ors.

State of Chhattisgarh Vs Ramcharan Rathore and Ors.

Mahendra Singh Rana and Ors. Vs State of Chhattisgarh and Ors.