Disposed

R. K. Panda v. State Of Chhattisgarh

Chhattisgarh HC4 Feb 2024WPS/6191/2017

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This court disposed of a writ petition filed for payment of retiral dues, earned leave, and fixation of final pension. The court rejected the claim for 229 days of earned leave as it was already sanctioned in a prior order and noted the petitioner failed to file the required affidavit.

What did the court decide?

The petition was disposed of; the petitioner was granted liberty to file a fresh writ petition for any remaining claim/dues.

R. K. Panda Vs State Of Chhattisgarh — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Chhattisgarh HC (2024)

¶1

¶2

NAFR

¶3

HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR

¶4

WPS No. 6191 of 2017

¶5

R. K. Panda S/o Late Rantidev Panda, Aged About 64 Years R/o House No. 32, Shriram Residency In Front Of Maharshi School Mangla Bilaspur, District Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh

¶6

---- Petitioner

¶7

Versus

¶8

State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Secretary, Department Of Forest, Mahanadi Bhawan, New Raipur Chhattisgarh

¶9

The Principal Chief Conservator Of Forest, Raipur, District Raipur, Chhattisgarh

¶10

The Conservator Of Forest, Forest Circle Bilaspur, District Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh

¶11

Divisional Forest Officer, Forest Division, Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh

¶12

---- Respondent

¶13

For Petitioner	Mr. AN Pandey, Advocate
For Respondent /State	Mr. Rajeev Bharat, Govt. Advocate

¶14

SB.: Hon'ble Mr. Justice Deepak Kumar Tiwari Order On Board

¶15

5/2/2024

¶16

Heard.

¶17

This petition has been filed by the petitioner for payment of retiral dues, payment of the amount of Earned Leave of 229 days and further, for fixation of the final pension of the petitioner.

¶18

At the outset, learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that on the earlier date of hearing i.e. 19.1.2024, learned State Counsel had

¶19

¶20

made a submission before this Court that the petitioner has sought payment of Earned Leave but the aforesaid leave has been adjusted in the Earned Leave, which has already been taken by him and for the same, Application-Annexure R/1 for grant of Earned Leave from 15.7.2015 to 29.2.2016, on the ground of ill -health of the petitioner, had also been filed. Learned counsel for the State also submitted on the said date that the gratuity had already been paid to the petitioner. Thereafter, learned counsel for the petitioner was directed to seek instructions from the petitioner as to whether any dues are still pending and to file an affidavit in this regard. However, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the State has wrongly adjusted the period of 229 days in his Earned Leave Account though the said period was to be adjusted in the Medical Leave Account.

¶21

Learned counsel for the State submits that the petitioner has sought payment of Earned Leave of 229 days. He submits that considering the fact that the petitioner himself has filed an application for grant of Earned Leave vide Annexure R/1 from 15.7.2015 to 29.2.2016 and in pursuance of such application, he was granted Earned Leave of 229 days vide order dated 4.10.2016 and the same was also sanctioned by the competent authority. Hence, the claim of the petitioner for payment of 229 days of Earned Leave is not tenable.

¶22

It is pertinent to mention here that in pursuance of the earlier direction by this Court on 19.1.2024, the petitioner has not filed any affidavit.

¶23

Considering the Earned Leave Application filed as Annexure-R/1, the

¶24

¶25

submission put forth by learned counsel for the State appears to be proper whereas the submission raised by learned counsel for the petitioner deserves to be rejected for the reason that his claims have already been settled.

¶26

In view of the above, the petition is disposed of. However, the petitioner would be at liberty to file a fresh writ petition, if any claim/dues still remains to be paid.

¶27

Sd/-

¶28

(Deepak Kumar Tiwari)

¶29

Judge

¶30

Shyna

R. K. Panda v. State Of Chhattisgarh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

R. K. Panda v. State Of Chhattisgarh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Sanjeev Kumar Korram Vs State Of Chhattisgarh and Ors.

Kamlesh Prasad Awasthi Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Asha Jog Vs State Govt Of Chhattisgarh

Smt. Ganga Bai (Died) through Legal Representative(S) Vs Md. Usman

Smt. Lata Shukla Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Bhavesh Bhogilal Patel Vs State of Chhattisgarh