Kanwal Das Manikpuri Vs State of Chhattisgarh

¶1

Digitally signed by ASHISH ASHISH TIWARI TIWARI Date:2026.02.16 11:02:53 +0530

¶2

2025:CGHC:1631

¶3

HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR

¶4

WPS No. 394 of 2022

¶5

Maniram Patel S/o Late Tirathram Patel Aged About 70 Years Retied Field Assistant (Sthal Sahayak) Resident Of Village Sarkhor Post Lavan District Balodabazar Bhatapara Chhattisgarh.

¶6

---- Petitioner

¶7

Versus

¶8

1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Secretary Water Resources Department Mahanadi Bhawan, Mantralaya Naya Raipur , District Raipur Chhattisgarh 2 - The Executive Engineer Water Resources Division, Lavan Balodabazar Bhatapara Chhattisgarh 3 - The Sub Divisional Officer Balar Nahar Sub Division, Kasdol , Now Lavan District Balodabazar Bhatapara Chhattisgarh

¶9

4 - The Joint Director Treasury Accounts And Penssion, Raipur , District Raipur Chhattisgarh.

¶10

--- Respondents

¶11

WPS No. 462 of 2022

¶12

Kanwal Das Manikpuri S/o Late Arati Das Manikpuri Aged About 75 Years Retied Field Assistant (Sthal Sahayak) Resident Of Gudi Chauk Village Lata ) Thashil Balodabazar District Balodabazar Bhatapara Chhattisgarh.

¶13

---- Petitioner

¶14

Versus

¶15

1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Secretary Water Resources Department Mahanadi Bhawan , Mantralaya Naya Raipur , District Raipur Chhattisgarh. 2 - The Executive Engineer Water Resources Division, Balodabazar Bhatapara Chhattisgarh.

¶16

3 - The Sub Divisional Officer Balar Nahar Sub Divisional Kasdol , Now District Balodabazar Bhatapara Chhattisgarh.

¶17

4 - The Joint Director Treasury , Accounts And Pension , Raipur , District Raipur Chhattisgarh.

¶18

--- Respondents

¶19

WPS No. 395 of 2022

¶20

Santu Lal Sahu S/o Late Raghu Nath Sahu Aged About 70 Years Retied Field Assistant (Sthal Sahayak) R/o Village, Post - Kasdol (New Gordha) Tahsil Kasdol, District Balodabazar Bhatapara Chhattisgarh.

---- Petitioner

-2-

Versus

1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Secretary, Water Resources Department Mahanadi Bhawan, Mantralaya, Naya Raipur, District Raipur Chhattisgarh.

¶25

2 - The Executive Engineer Water Resources Division, Balodabazar Bhatapara Chhattisgarh.

¶26

3 - The Sub Divisional Officer Balar Nahar Sub Division, Kasdol, Now Disrict Balodabazar Bhatapara Chhattisgarh.

¶27

4 - The Joint Director Treasury, Account And Pension, Raipur, District Raipur Chhattisgarh.

¶28

--- Respondents

¶29

WPS No. 399 of 2022

¶30

Prahlad Sahu S/o Shri Dayaram Sahu Aged About 80 Years Retied Field Assistant (Sthal Sahayak) Resident Of Village Post Pisaude Thashil Kasdol , District Baloda Bazar Bhatapara Chhattisgarh.

¶31

---- Petitioner

¶32

Versus

¶33

1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Secretary Water Resources Department Mahanadi Bhawan, Mantralaya , Nava Raipur , District Raipur Chhattisgarh. 2 - The Executive Engineer Water Resources Division, Balodabazar Bhatapara Chhattisgarh.

¶34

3 - The Sub Divisional Officer Balar Nahar Sub Division, Kasdol , Now District Balodabazar Bhatapara Chhattisgarh

¶35

4 - The Joint Director Treasury Accounts And Penssion, Raipur District Raipur Chhattisgarh.

¶36

	--- Respondents
For Petitioners	: Shri Ankul Biswas, Advocate.
For respective Respondent / State	: Shri Rohitashva Singh, Dy. G.A.

¶37

Hon'ble Shri Justice Sachin Singh Rajput

¶38

Order on Board

¶39

05/02/2026

¶40

These writ petitions have been filed by the petitioners seeking for the following

¶41

relief :

¶42

10.1 That this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to issue an appropriate writ, directing the respondent authorities to including the service period spent by the petitioner as temporary employee, for pensionable service, as per circular dated 02.03.2005 of State Government and as per order

¶43

-3-

¶44

dated 01.04.2019 passed by the Hon'ble Devision Bench of this Hon'ble Court in W.A. No. 88 2019 along with other bench of appeals, with @ 18% annum;

¶45

10.2 That, this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to grant any oth relief/relief's in favour of the petitioners, which the Hon'ble Court deemed fit & just in the facts and circumstance of the case including awarding of the costs to the petitioner.

¶46

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner was initially appointed as a daily wage employee and was subsequently regularized on different dates. After the retirement of the petitioners, their retiral dues including pension and leave encashment were paid to them by calculating their service only from the date of his regularization. He further submits that while the gratuity was paid by also counting the period served by them as a daily wager, no such claim was granted to the petitioners regarding their pension and leave encashment. Consequently, these writ petition were filed seeking the aforementioned relief.

¶47

Learned counsel for the respondents submits that the core issue involved in these writ petitions whether the services rendered by the employees as daily wagers are required to be counted for the purpose of granting pension and other monetary benefits is currently under consideration before the Hon’ble Supreme Court in SLP (Civil) No.8677-8678/ 2023. He further submits that identical petitions have previously been filed before this Court, which were disposed of with the observation that the order passed by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the above stated SLP would decide the fate of those petitioners. Accordingly, the rights of the present petitioners will depend upon the final decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in said SLP. He placed reliance upon the order passed by this Court in WPS No. 10696/ 2019 dated 14.10.2024 and prays that these writ petition may also be disposed of in light of order passed by this Court.

¶48

This Court in WPS No. 10696/ 2019 in Para 6 observed as under:-

¶49

-4-

¶50

““6. Accordingly, the bunch of these writ petitions (s) deserve to be disposed of with a direction that the judgment passed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in SLP (C) No. 86778678/2023 will be applicable mutatis mutandis in the facts and circumstances of the case of the petitioners and their entitlement to get additional pension will be governed by the decision of Hon'ble Supreme Court in SLP (C) No. 86778678/2023. It is also directed that if SLP (C) No. 8677-8678

¶51

of 2023 is decided in favour of the petitioners, the respondents shall extend the benefit to the petitioners without any further delay. It is also directed that if the grievance of the petitioners still exists, the petitioners shall be at liberty to file a fresh petition raising their grievances.

¶52

Thus, these writ petitions are also disposed of in terms of order passed in WPS No. 10696/ 2019.

¶53

6. All pending applications stand disposed of.

¶54

Sd/(Sachin Singh Rajput) Judge

¶55

Ashish

Kanwal Das Manikpuri v. State of Chhattisgarh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Kanwal Das Manikpuri 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

Shiv Shankar Sao Vs Smt. Osho Devi - Dead. through Lrs.

Shrenik Kumar Jain Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Swaraj Baghel Vs Smt. Manorama Baghel

Juhi Women Self Help Group Ranka Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Laxman Yadav Vs the State of Chhattisgarh

Aditya Goel Vs Akashdeep Goel