Keshaw Ram Bhakta v. State Of Chhattisgarh

Chhattisgarh HC10 Apr 2025WPS/780/2017

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Chhattisgarh High Court, Bilaspur; WPS No. 780 of 2017; decided 11.04.2025 by Rakesh Mohan Pandey, J. Retired Head Master's petition on GPF final settlement, salary/5th Pay Commission arrears from 01.01.1996, alleged double deduction of temporary advance from Part Final payment, and challenge to Pension Nirakaran Samiti order dated 23/09/2015; petition disposed of with liberty to file fresh representation; respondents No.3 to 5 directed to decide it within 120 days; no ruling on merits; no statutes or precedents cited in the order.

What did the court decide?

Liberty reserved to the petitioner to make a fresh representation before respondents No.3 to 5 raising his grievances; respondent authorities directed to decide the representation preferably within 120 days from receipt of a copy of the order. ¶¶32

Keshaw Ram Bhakta Vs State Of Chhattisgarh — Chhattisgarh HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶¶32

Issue for consideration

Whether the order dated 23/09/2015 issued by the Pension Dismantling Committee (Pension Nirakaran Samiti), General Administration Department, should be set aside. +3 more

¶¶21

Ratio / Principle

Taking into consideration the limited prayer of the petitioner, the petition was disposed of reserving liberty to make a fresh representation before respondents No.3 to 5, and the respondent authorities were directed to decide such representation preferably within 120 days from receipt of a copy of the order. No finding was returned on the merits of the monetary claims or the challenge to the order dated 23/09/2015.

¶¶32

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Writ Petition (WPS No. 780 of 2017) — pension/GPF dispute of a retired Head Master (retired 30.05.2004) — petitioner sought (i) quashing of order dated 23/09/2015 of the Pension Dismantling Committee (Pension Nirakaran Samiti), General Administration Department, Chhattisgarh; (ii) final settlement of GPF and salary arrears including 5th Pay Scale arrears from 01.01.1996, with interest, quantified at Rs. 59,608/-; (iii) correction of the Final Payment Computation Sheet on the plea that a temporary advance already repaid was again deducted from Part Final payment; and (iv) Rs. 50,000/- towards litigation cost and compensation — representation dated 01.10.2015 before respondents No.3 to 5 (Accountant General, DEO Dhamtari, BEO Kurud) had remained undecided — HELD: disposing of the petition on the limited prayer, the Court reserved liberty to file a fresh representation and directed respondents No.3 to 5 to decide it preferably within 120 days of receipt of the order copy; no adjudication on the merits of the monetary claims or the challenge to the 2015 order — Bench: Rakesh Mohan Pandey, J.; decided 11.04.2025.

2025:CGHC:16944

NAFR

HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR

¶5

WPS No. 780 of 2017

¶6

Digitally REKHASINGH signedbyREKHA SINGH 1 - Keshaw Ram Bhakta S/o Late Shri Vishal Ram Bhakta, Aged About 75 Years Post Retired Head Master, Department Of School Education, R/o Batena Ward, Behind Arjuni Police Station, Dhamtari, District Dhamtari, Chhattisgarh, Chhattisgarh

¶7

... Petitioner(s)

¶8

versus

¶9

1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Secretary, Department Of School Education, Ministry, Mahanadi Bhavan, New Raipur, District Raipur, Chhattisgarh, Chhattisgarh

¶10

2 - The President, Pension Dismanting Committee Pension Nirakaran Samiti, General Administration Department, State Of Chhattisgarh, Ministry, Mahanadi Bhavan, New Raipur, Chhattisgarh, District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh

¶11

3 - Accountant General, Through The Assistant Account Officer, Office Of The Accountant General, General Provident Fund Section, Raipur, District Raipur, Chhattisgarh, District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh

¶12

4 - District Education Officer, Dhamtari, District Dhamtari, Chhattisgarh, District : Dhamtari, Chhattisgarh

¶13

5 - Block Education Officer, Block Kurud, District Dhamtari, Chhattisgarh, District : Dhamtari, Chhattisgarh

¶14

---- Respondents

¶15

For Petitioner	Mr. Alok Kumar Dewangan, Advocate
For State	Mr. Dashrath Prajapati, Panel Lawyer
For Respondents No.3	Mr. Ashwani Shukla, Advocate

¶16

Hon'ble Shri Justice Rakesh Mohan Pandey

Order on Board

11.04.2025

-2-

The petitioner has filed this petition seeking the following relief(s):-

¶21

“10.1 The Hon'ble court may kindly be pleased to set aside the Order Dated 23/09/2015 issued by the Pension Dismantling Committee (Pension Nirakaran Samiti), General Administration Department, State of Chhattisgarh, Ministry, Mahanadi Bavan, New Raipur, C.G.

¶22

10.2 The Hon'ble court may kindly be pleased to direct the Respondents to settle the entire legitimate claim of the petitioner from his General Provident Fund Account, Arrears of Salary, wrongly computed amount from his Final Payment Computation Sheet imposing suitable interest with in stipulated time frame.

¶23

10.3 That, the Hon'ble court may kindly be pleased to direct the Respondents to pay Rupees 59,608/- to the petitioner from his General Provident Fund Account, Arrears of salary and other dues which is still not paid to the petitioner & arrears of 5th pay Scale for which petitioner is entitle to get from 01 January 1996 were not paid to the petitioner till date.

¶24

10.4 That, the Hon'ble court may kindly be pleased to direct the Respondents for correction of records, since the amount which was already deposited by the petitioner taken under temporary advance head was again deducted from his Part Final, mentioning it to be taken as Part Final from Final Payment Computation sheet due to these errors of the respondent's petitioner is unable to get his legitimate claim.

¶25

10.5 That, the Hon'ble court may kindly be pleased to direct the Respondents to decide all the pending representation of the petitioner with in stipulated time frame and make payment of expense for unnecessary litigation and compensation for undue suffering i.e. Rs. 50,000/- to the petitioner.

¶26

10.6 That, any other Writ, order, directions or relief which the petitioner is entitle and this Hon'ble Court may deem fit may kindly be passed in favour of the petitioner.”

¶27

Mr. Dewangan, the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner got retired from the post of Head Master on 30.05.2004. He would further submit that the amount of GPF has not been settled finally by the department and arrears of

¶28

¶29

the 5^th pay commission from 01.01.1996 to 01.01.2004 have also not been paid yet. He would contend that the petitioner has made a representation before respondents No.3 to 5 on 01.10.2015 but till date, the same has not been considered and decided. He would pray that a direction may be issued to the respondent authorities to decide the pending representation.

¶30

On the other hand, Mr. Prajapati, the learned Panel Lawyer appearing for the State and Mr. Shukla, learned counsel appearing for respondent No.3 would oppose the submissions made by Mr. Dewangan.

¶31

Heard learned Advocates appearing for the parties and perused the documents placed on the record.

¶32

Taking into consideration the limited prayer made by Mr. Dewangan, this petition, at this juncture, is disposed of reserving liberty in favour of the petitioner to make a fresh representation before respondents No.3 to 5 raising his grievances and in turn, the respondent authorities are directed to decide the representation so made by the petitioner preferably within a period of 120 days from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.

¶33

With the aforesaid observation(s), the present petition is disposed of.

¶34

Sd/(Rakesh Mohan Pandey) Judge

¶35

Rekha

Keshaw Ram Bhakta v. State Of Chhattisgarh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Keshaw Ram Bhakta 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

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Rahul Giri Goswami Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Janki Bai Vs Geeta Bai

G.venkat Reddy And Ors. Vs State Of Chhattisgarh And Ors.

Mukund Vs Panku (Died) Through Legal Heirs

Sanjay Agrawal Vs State Of Chhattisgarh and Ors.

Ghurauram Chauhan Vs The State Of Chhattisgarh