Disposed¶28

Smt. Sheela Agrawal v. State of Chhattisgarh

Chhattisgarh HC16 Feb 2025WPS/794/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Family pension; widow of late Chief Lokayukt; Pramukh Lokayukta; Chhattisgarh Lok Ayog Adhiniyam, 2002; Section 17(1)(6)(4); Chhattisgarh Pramukh Lokayukta and Lokayukta (Conditions of Service) Rules, 2008; Rule 11 amendment; notification dated 04.10.2024; retrospective effect; vires of Rules; cause of action; liberty to challenge vires; family benefit to continue; WPS No. 794 of 2021; Sheela Agrawal v. State of Chhattisgarh; Justice Narendra Kumar Vyas; decided 17.02.2025; disposed of with liberty.

What did the court decide?

Writ petition disposed of with liberty to the petitioner to challenge the vires of the notification dated 04.10.2024 so far as it relates to grant of family pension w.e.f. 21st August, 2024; family benefit under the notification to continue without hindrance. ¶28

Smt. Sheela Agrawal Vs State of Chhattisgarh — Chhattisgarh HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶28

Issue for consideration

Whether the petitioner, widow of the late Justice K.M. Agrawal (retired Chief Justice of the High Court of Sikkim and former Chief Lokayukt of Chhattisgarh), is entitled to grant of family pension. +1 more

¶19

Ratio / Principle

Since the proposed amendment changes the cause of action and the vires of the amended Rules has not been assailed, the amendment application cannot be considered at this juncture.

¶25

Key takeaways

The writ petition is disposed of granting the petitioner liberty to challenge the vires of the notification dated 04.10.2024 so far as it relates to grant of family pension w.e.f. 21st August, 2024.ratio¶27
Whatever family benefit is being given by the notification dated 04.10.2024 will continue without any hindrance.ratio¶27

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Chhattisgarh High Court (Bilaspur), single Bench of Justice Narendra Kumar Vyas, disposed of WPS No. 794 of 2021 (Smt. Sheela Agrawal v. State of Chhattisgarh) on 17.02.2025. The petitioner, widow of late Justice K.M. Agrawal — a retired Chief Justice of the High Court of Sikkim who later served as Chief Lokayukt of Chhattisgarh under the Chhattisgarh Lok Ayog Adhiniyam, 2002 — had sought family pension after his death. During pendency, the State amended the Chhattisgarh Pramukh Lokayukta and Lokayukta (Conditions of Service) Rules, 2008 (notification dated 04.10.2024), inserting provisions after Rule 11 pegging pension and family pension of the Pramukh Lokayukta to those of a retired Judge of the Supreme Court or a retired Chief Justice/Judge of a High Court, based on salary last drawn as per Section 4 of the Act. The petitioner, already receiving family pension under the amendment, sought retrospective effect through an amendment application. The Court held that the amendment changes the cause of action and cannot be considered unless the vires of the Rules is assailed; it accordingly disposed of the petition, granting liberty to challenge the vires of the 04.10.2024 notification insofar as it relates to family pension w.e.f. 21.08.2024, while directing that the family benefit already flowing under the notification shall continue without hindrance.

2025:CGHC:8193

NAFR

HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR

¶5

WPS No. 794 of 2021

¶6

Smt. Sheela Agrawal W/o Late Justice Shri K.M. Agrawal Aged About 73 Years Retd. Chief Lokayukt, C.G. Lok Ayog, R/o House No. 305, Nearby Bakshi Dental Clinic, Sundar Nagar, Raipur, District- Raipur, Chhattisgarh, District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh

¶7

... Petitioner

¶8

versus

¶9

State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Secretary, General Administration Department, Mahanadi Bhavan, Mantralaya, Atal Nagar, Raipur, District Raipur, Chhattisgarh, District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh

¶10

Secretary Chhattisgarh Lok Ayog, Raipur, Gandhi Chowk, Raipur, District Raipur, Chhattisgarh, District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh

¶11

Accountant General (A And E) Vidhan Sabha, Road, Raipur, District- Raipur, Chhattisgarh, District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh

¶12

... Respondent(s)

¶13

For Petitioner	: Mr. H.B. Agrawal, Sr. Advocate alongwith Mrs. Swati Agrawal, Advocate
For Respondent/State	: Mr. Kalpesh Ruparel, Pane Lawyer
For Respondent No. 2	: Mr. A.K. Samantray, Advocate

¶14

Hon'ble Shri Justice Narendra Kumar Vyas Order on Board

¶15

17.02.2025

¶16

The petitioner is wife of retired Chief Justice of High Court of Sikkim and thereafter he was appointed as Chief Lokayukt in the State of Chhattisgarh under the Chhattisgarh Lok Ayog Adhiniyam, 2002 and

¶17

Digitally
signed by
MANISH
MANISH YADAV
YADAV Date:
2025.03.25
15:42:05
+0530

¶18

¶19

after retirement he expired on 04.12.2025. After death of retired Justice Mr. K.M. Agrawal, the petitioner has preferred this writ petition for grant of family pension. Later on during pendency of writ petition the State has amend the Chhattisgarh Pramukh Lokayukta and Lokayukta (Conditions of Service) Rules, 2008 while exercising its power under Section 17(1)(6)(4) of Chhattigarh Lok Ayog Adhiniyam, 2002. Accordingly, after first paragraph of Rule 11, the following paragraphs have been inserted:-

¶20

“1. For first para of Rule 11, the following para shall be substituted, namely:-

¶21

“Pension Payable:- The Pramukh Lokayukt shall be paid pension at the rates prescribed by the relevant law for a retired Judge of the Supreme Court of India or a retired Chief Justice or a retired Judge of a High Court and as would be admissible for such salary of which was last paid to the Pramukh Lokayukta as per Section 4 of the Act, for each completed year of rendering services as Pramukh Lokayukta.”

¶22

After first Para of rule 11, the following Para shall be inserted, namely:-

¶23

“Where the Pramukh Lokayukta dies, whether before or after retirement, his family pensioner entitled to receive the pension shall be paid family pension calculated at the rat, prescribed by relevant law for a retired Judge of Supreme Court of India or a retired Chief Justice or a retired Judge of a High Court, as would be admissible for such post salary of which was last paid to the Pramukh Lokayukt as per Section 4 of the Act.”

¶24

Mr. H.B. Agrawal, learned Sr. Advocate alongwith Mrs. Swati Agrawal, learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that in persuasion of the amendment made on 04.10.2024, the present petitioner is getting family pension, but according to him it should have retrospective effect for that he has moved this application for amendment.

¶25

Since the said amendment is changing the cause of action and unless and until the vires of these Rules have not been assailed, the amendment cannot be considered at this juncture, therefore, the writ

¶26

¶27

petition is disposed of granting liberty to challenge the vires of the notification dated 04.10.2024 so far as it relates to grant of family pension w.e.f. 21^st August, 2024. It is also made clear that whatever the family benefit is being given by this notification, this will be continue without any hindrance.

¶28

With aforesaid observation and liberty granted in favour of the petitioner, the writ petition is disposed of.

¶29

Sd/(Narendra Kumar Vyas) Judge

¶30

Manish

Smt. Sheela Agrawal v. State of Chhattisgarh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Smt. Sheela Agrawal 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

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Co-Operative Marketing Society Maryadit Vs Board of Revenue

Ram Prasad Sahu Vs State Of Chhattisgarh

Rashmita Patel Vs Vivekanand Patel

Smt. Milibai Yadav Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Akhilesh Kumar Bharadwaj Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Sumit Soni Vs State of Chhattisgarh