Smt. Neelmani Ekka (Lakda) Vs State of Chhattisgarh — Chhattisgarh HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

Smt. Neelmani Ekka (Lakda) Vs State of Chhattisgarh — Chhattisgarh HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Writ petition disposed of in the same terms as W.P. No. 4642/2004 (Baijnath Mandal): Advocate General's office to forward the case to the Pension Committee within 15 days; Committee to pass a reasoned order within a further 3 months after hearing; entire exercise including retiral dues and other pensionary benefits to be completed within three months; petitioner to supply extra copy of the petition to State/respondents' counsel for forwarding; liberty reserved to file a fresh writ petition if the Committee's decision, including on interest, goes against the petitioner.

Issue for consideration

Whether the petitioner's claim for retiral dues and other pensionary benefits is required to be considered by the Pension Committee.

Court's answer

The petition is disposed of in the same terms as W.P. No. 4642/2004 (Baijnath Mandal): the office of the Advocate General is directed to send the case to the Committee within 15 days of receipt of a copy of the petition and this order.

Ratio / Principle

The Committee shall consider the matter and pass a reasoned order within a further period of 3 months, in accordance with law, after affording proper opportunity of hearing to the parties; additional documents may be filed by the petitioner and the officers concerned.

Key takeaways

The entire exercise, including payment of retiral dues of the employee and other pensionary benefits, if any, to the petitioner, is to be completed within a period of three months from receipt of a copy of this order.ratio¶17
Liberty is reserved to the petitioner to move a fresh writ petition if the decision made by the Committee on any claim, including the claim for interest, is decided against the petitioner.ratio¶20

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Retiral dues / pensionary benefits — retired Assistant Grade-2 employee of Water Resources Department — petition jointly submitted by counsel to be covered by the judgment in W.P. No. 4642/2004 (Baijnath Mandal v. State of Chhattisgarh), whereby such matters involving disputed questions of fact are to be considered by the Pension Committee constituted pursuant to the order in W.P. No. 1961/2006 (Keja Bai Chandrakar) and the order in M.C.C. No. 105 of 2008 — writ petition disposed of in the same terms: office of the Advocate General to send the case to the Committee within 15 days; Committee to pass a reasoned order within a further 3 months after proper opportunity of hearing; entire exercise including retiral dues and other pensionary benefits to be completed within three months; liberty reserved to the petitioner to move a fresh writ petition if the Committee's decision on any claim, including interest, is against her.

1

NAFR

HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR

WPS No. 3935 of 2025

1 - Smt. Neelmani Ekka (Lakda) W/o Juvel Lakda Aged About 62 Years (Assistant Grade-2) Retired From The Office Of Executive Engineer, Kharang Water Resources Department), R/o In-Front Of Railway Line, Behind Shiv Mandir, Hemu Nagar, District Bilaspur (C.G.)

... Petitioner(s)

versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Secretary, Water Resources Department, Sector 19, Mahanadi Bhawan, Atal Nagar, Raipur (C.G.) 2 - Chief Engineer Hasdeo Cannal, Water Resources Department, District Bilaspur (C.G.) 3 - Superintending Engineer Kharang Water Resources Department, Bilaspur (C.G.) 4 - Executive Engineer Water Resources Department, Jashpur, District Jashpur (C.G.)

5 - Accountant General (A And E) Zero Point, Baloda-Bazaar Road, P.O. Vidhan Sabha, District Raipur (C.G.)

		... Respondent(s)
For Petitioner(s)	:	Shri S.B. Pandey, Advocate.
For State	:	Shri Khulesh Sahu, Panel Lawyer.
For Respondent 5	:	Shri Ashwani Shukla, Advocate.

Hon’ble Shri Justice Ravindra Kumar Agrawal, J

Order on Board

12.06.2025

1 . Learned counsel for the parties would submit that the issue involved and the relief claimed in the present petition are required to be considered by the Pension Committee.

2 . This Court in the matter of W.P. No. 4642/2004 (Baijnath Mandal v. The State 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 Government and Others)

2

and order dated 13/03/2008 passed in M.C.C. No. 105 of 2008 (State of Chhattisgarh & Others V. Baijnath Mandal and another). Thus, this petition is squarely covered by the judgment and order dated 31 of January, 2008 passed in W.P. No. 4642/2004 Baijnath Mandal (supra) as submitted by learned counsel appearing for the parties.

3 . 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 petition from the petitioner and this order. The Committee shall consider and pass a reasoned order within a further period of 3 months, 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 retiral dues of the employee and other pensionary benefits, if any, to the petitioner be completed within a period of three months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.

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

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

6 . Liberty as prayed for is granted.

7 . Accordingly, the writ petition stands disposed of.

Sd/(Ravindra Kumar Agrawal) Judge

inder