Smt. Vimla Bairagi Vs State of Chhattisgarh

¶1

1

¶2

RAVI SHANKAR MANDAVI Digitally signed byRAVI SHANKARMANDAVI Date: 2026.04.1719:32:19 +0530

¶3

2026:CGHC:17116

¶4

NAFR

¶5

HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR

¶6

WPS No. 3267 of 2026

¶7

1 - Smt. Vimla Bairagi W/o Late Kanhaiya Lal Bairagi Aged About 31 Years R/o House No. 33, Village- Khorigaon, Tahsil- Baramkela, DistrictSarangarh-Bilaigarh (C.G.)

¶8

2 - Smt. Payal Baghel W/o Late Ravindranath Baghel Aged About 45 Years R/o Village- Kauatal, Tahsil- Sarangarh, District- SarangarhBilaigarh (C.G.)

¶9

3 - Smt. Parvati Jolhe W/o Late Vishnu Dayal Jolhe Aged About 39 Years R/o Village- Hardi, Tahsil- Sarangarh, District- SarangarhBilaigarh (C.G.)

¶10

4 - Smt. Laxmin Anant W/o Late Dileshwar Anant Aged About 38 Years R/o Village- Khursi, Tahsil- Sarangah, District- Sarangarh-Bilaigarh (C.G.)

¶11

5 - Smt. Asha Chauhan W/o Late Kailash Chauhan Aged About 47 Years R/o Village- Malda (B), Tahsil- Sarangarh, District- SarangarhBilaigarh (C.G.)

¶12

... Petitioner(s)

¶13

versus

¶14

1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Secretary, Scheduled Caste And Scheduled Tribe Development Department, Mahanadi Bhawan, Mantralaya, Atal Nagar, New Raipur, District- Raipur (C.G.)

¶15

2 - The Secretary Government Of Chhattisgarh, Finance Department, Mahanadi Bhawan, Mantralaya, Atal Nagar, New Raipur, District- Raipur (C.G.)

¶16

2

¶17

3 - The Commissioner Scheduled Caste And Scheduled Tribe Development Chhattisgarh, Atal Nagar, Nawa Raipur, District- Raipur (C.G.)

¶18

4 - The Collector District- Sarangarh-Bilaigarh (C.G.)

¶19

5 - The Assistant Commissioner Tribal Development, DistrictSarangarh-Bilaigarh (C.G.)

¶20

6 - The Joint Director Treasury, Accounts And Pension, Bilaspur Division, District- Bilaspur (C.G.)

¶21

7 - The District Treasury Officer District- Sarangarh-Bilaigarh (C.G.) ... Respondent(s)

¶22

(Cause title is taken from CIS)

¶23

For Petitioners : Mr. Harish Khuntiya, Advocate For State/Respondents : Ms. Poorva Tiwari, Panel Lawyer

¶24

SB: Hon'ble Shri Parth Prateem Sahu, Judge

¶25

Order on Board

¶26

15/04/2026

¶27

Learned counsel for the petitioners submit that petitioners are legal representative of the respective deceased employees. Husbands of the petitioners were under employment of the respondents. Husbands of petitioners died on the dates as

¶28

given below :

¶29

Sl.	Name of the petitioners with her	Date of death of
No.	husbands name	employee on
		harness
1.	Smt. Vimla Bairagi W/o Late	18.08.2022
	Kanhaiya Lal Bairagi
2.	Smt. Payal Baghel W/o Late	12.07.2022

¶30

3

¶31

	Ravindranath Baghel
3.	Smt. Parvati Jolhe Vishnu Dayal Jolhe	W/o Late 28.09.2024
4.	Smt. Laxmin Anant Dileshwar Anant	W/o Late 23.12.2023
5.	Smt. Asha Chauhan Kailash Chauhan	W/o Late 22.08.2023

¶32

Though the husbands of the petitioners were paid regular pay scale from 20.09.2021, but they were entitled for regular pay scale after completion of 3 years as held by Division Bench of this Court in W.A. No.481/2015 (Prakash Dansena and Others vs. State of Chhattisgarh & others and other bunch of writ appeals decided on 3.10.2015. The C.G. Laghu Vetan Shashkiya Chaturth Warg Karmchari Sangh has made representation, however it is not considered. He submitted that petitioners may be permitted to submit a fresh representation before the respondent authorities and direction be issued to the concerned authorities to consider and to take decision on the same at the earliest within a specific time frame.

¶33

Learned counsel for the State submits that he is having no objection to the limited prayer made by counsel for the petitioner.

¶34

I have heard learned counsel appearing for the parties.

¶35

On due consideration of submission of the learned counsel for the respective parties and facts and circumstances of the case, without entering into merits of the case, the writ petition at this

¶36

4

¶37

stage is disposed of permitting the petitioner(s) to submit a fresh comprehensive representation before the respondents No.4 & 5 and in the event, such a representation(s) is/are submitted, the concerned respondent authority shall consider and take decision on the said representation(s) in accordance with law, preferably expeditiously within a further period of 3 months from the date of receipt of the representation.

¶38

With the aforesaid observation and direction, this writ petition stands finally disposed of .

¶39

Sd/-

¶40

(Parth Prateem Sahu) Judge

¶41

Ravi Mandavi

Smt. Vimla Bairagi v. State of Chhattisgarh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Smt. Vimla Bairagi 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

Dr. Shesh Ram Mandavi Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Rajesh Puri Goswami Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Dhaneshwar Prasad Sahu Vs Mahesh Sakalle

Kirit Lal Nishad Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Smt. Seema Baghel Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Dilip Kumar Khandwe Vs Employees Provident Fund Organization