Disposed¶28

Shanti Hota v. State of Chhattisgarh

Chhattisgarh HC20 Apr 2025WPS/1352/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Chhattisgarh High Court Bilaspur; WPS No. 1352 of 2024; decided 21/04/2025 by Bibhu Datta Guru, J.; gratuity of retired teacher (Lecturer Hindi, retired 31.10.2012); Carmel Girls Higher Secondary School Raigarh; claim Rs. 17,70,401/-; State circular dated 20.05.2024; Division Bench order WPL No. 223 of 2017 dated 10.05.2024; private unaided educational institutions; teachers retired after 03.04.1997 till 31.03.2013; direction to pay within 60 days after verification; petition disposed of.

What did the court decide?

Direction to respondent No. 5 to release the gratuity amount as claimed by the petitioner, after verification, within a period of 60 days; petitioner at liberty to apprise the concerned authority of the order. ¶28

Shanti Hota Vs State of Chhattisgarh — Chhattisgarh HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶28

Issue for consideration

Whether the respondent authorities are liable to pay the petitioner gratuity amounting to Rs. 17,70,401/- , she having retired on 31.10.2012 as Lecturer (Hindi) from Carmel Girls Higher Secondary School, Raigarh.

¶22

Court's answer

In view of the State Government circular dated 20.05.2024 (issued referring to the Division Bench order in WPL No. 223 of 2017, dated 10.05.2024) directing private unaided educational institutions to pay gratuity to teachers retired after 03.04.1997 till 31.03.2013, and the petitioner having retired on 31.10.2012 (within that window), the writ petition was disposed of with a direction to respondent No. 5 to release the gratuity amount as claimed by the petitioner after verification within a period of 60 days.

¶28

Ratio / Principle

The petitioner's retirement on 31.10.2012 falls within the class of teachers (retired after 03.04.1997 till 31.03.2013) for whom the State directed private unaided educational institutions to pay gratuity, making the circular applicable to her claim.

¶27

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Writ petition (WPS No. 1352 of 2024, High Court of Chhattisgarh, Bibhu Datta Guru, J., decided 21/04/2025) by a 74-year-old retiree who served as Lecturer (Hindi) at Carmel Girls Higher Secondary School, Raigarh, and superannuated on 31.10.2012, seeking gratuity of Rs. 17,70,401/-. Her representation dated 27.03.2023 went undecided, and respondent No. 5 failed to file the affidavit directed by order dated 12.03.2024, though it offered to pay gratuity per the State Government circular dated 20.05.2024 — issued referring to the Division Bench order in WPL No. 223 of 2017, dated 10.05.2024, and directing private educational institutions to pay gratuity to teachers retired after 03.04.1997 till 31.03.2013. Since the petitioner's retirement fell within that period, the Court disposed of the petition directing respondent No. 5 to release the gratuity as claimed after verification within 60 days. No statute was cited in the judgment; the precedent was only referred via the circular.

2025:CGHC:17968

NAFR

HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR

¶5

WPS No. 1352 of 2024

¶6

Digitally signed by JYOTI JYOTI SHARMA SHARMA Date: 2025.04.22 10:28:02 +0530

¶7

1 Shanti Hota W/o Ashish Hota Aged About 74 Years R/o Naya Ganj, Near B.S.N.L. Office Belauda, Raigarh, District Raigarh (C.G.)

¶8

... Petitioner(s)

¶9

versus

¶10

1 State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Secretary School Education Department Mantralaya, Mahanadi Bhawan, Nava Raipur, Atal Nagar, Raipur, District Raipur (C.G.)

¶11

2 Director Directorate Of Public Instrucion Indrawati Bhawan, Atal Nagar, Naya Raipur, District Raipur (C.G.)

¶12

3 Divisional Joint Director Education Division Bilaspur, District Bilaspur (C.G.)

¶13

4 District Education Officer Raigarh, District Raigarh (C.G.)

¶14

5 Carmel Girls Higher Secondary School Through Its Manager, Raigarh, District Raigarh (C.G.)

¶15

... Respondent(s) For Petitioner(s) : Shri Vedant Shadangi, Advocate For Respondent/ : Shri Kanwaljeet Singh Saini, P.L.

¶16

¶17

State For Respondent : Shri Siddhant Das on behalf of Shri Vivek No. 5 Sharma, Advocate

¶18

Hon’ble Shri Bibhu Datta Guru, Judge

Order on Board

21/04/2025

Heard.

By the present writ petition, the petitioner, who retired on 31.10.2012, from the post of Lecturer (Hindi) from Carmel Girls, Higher Secondary School, Raigarh is seeking a direction towards the respondent authorities for payment of gratuity amounting to Rs. 17,70,401/- .

¶23

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits, that the petitioner has also submitted a representation to the authorities dated 27.03.2023, however till date neither the representation has been decided nor the gratuity amount has been released. He further submits that by order dated 12.03.2024, respondent No. 5 was directed to file affidavit explaining as to why the amount of gratuity has not been paid to the petitioner, but till date affidavit has also not been filed.

¶24

Learned counsel for respondent No. 5 on instructions submits that though the affidavit has not been filed, still respondent No. 5 is

¶25

¶26

willing to pay the gratuity amount as per the circular of the State government dated 20.05.2024. By which the state government by referring the order of the Division Bench of this Court in WPL No. 223 of 2017, dated 10.05.2024, directed all private educational institution to pay the amount of gratuity to the teachers retired after 03.04.1997 till 31.03.2013.

¶27

I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the records and the circular issued by the State government dated 20.05.2024 whereby the State government has directed to the private unaided education institutions to pay gratuity to the teachers retired after 03.04.1997 till 31.03.2013 and as the petitioner has retired on 31.10.2012.

¶28

Considering the same, the present writ petition is disposed off with a direction to respondent No. 5 to release the gratuity amount as claimed by the petitioner after verification within a period of 60 days from today.

¶29

With the aforesaid observation, the petition stands disposed off.

¶30

The petitioner is at liberty to apprise the concerned authority about the order of this court.

¶31

Sd/-

¶32

(Bibhu Datta Guru)

¶33

JUDGE

¶34

Jyoti

Shanti Hota v. State of Chhattisgarh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Shanti Hota v. State of Chhattisgarh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Smt. Seeta Devi Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Yogesh Nayak Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Shyam Singh Khanna Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Manharan Lal Sahu Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Gulab Yadav Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Ratan Das Vs State of Chhattisgarh