Dismissed¶¶46

Smt. Kanti Baghel v. State of Chhattisgarh

Chhattisgarh HC4 Jan 2026WPS/5454/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Pension to retired employees/teachers of government-aided schools; parity with State Government employees refused absent particular rules; writ petition (WPS No. 5454 of 2022) dismissed by High Court of Chhattisgarh, Bilaspur (Sachin Singh Rajput, J., 05/01/2026) following its own earlier dismissal of identical matters in WPS No. 2789 of 2017 and connected cases; claim for grant-in-aid/special grant for pension also fails with the dismissal.

What did the court decide?

Since the issue raised in this writ petition has already been dealt with and decided against the petitioners in WPS No. 2789 of 2017, the present writ petition is likewise dismissed in light of the order passed therein. ¶¶46

Smt. Kanti Baghel Vs State of Chhattisgarh — Chhattisgarh HC (2026) — LawSathi Research

¶1

¶2

NAFR

¶3

HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR

¶4

WPS No. 5454 of 2022

¶5

1 - Smt. Kanti Baghel W/o Shri Baldav Singh Aged About 71 Years R/o Ward No. 9, Thhakar Bapa Ward, Gondwara Road, Gudhiyari, Raipur Chhattisgarh.

¶6

2 - Smt. Pushplata Kaser, D/o Shri Loknath Kaser, Aged About 76 Years R/o Near Panchmukhi Hanuman Mandir, Changorabhata, Raipur Chhattisgarh

¶7

3 - Shri Suresh Chand Sharma S/o Badri Prasad Sharma Aged About 70 Years R/o Near Railway Under Bridge, Gudhiyari Chowk, Raipur Chhattisgarh

¶8

4 - Smt. Aruna Hariharno W/o Shri Ashok Kumar Hariharno Aged About 68 Years R/o Near Panchmukhi Hanuman Mandir, Changorabhata, Raipur, Chhattisgarh.

¶9

5 - Shri Bhuvanlal S/o Ramadhar Aged About 66 Years R/o Aadarsh Nagar Ward No. 64 Sundar Nagar, Raipur Chhattisgarh

¶10

6 - Shri Ritadhwaj Tiwari S/o Devdatt Kumar Aged About 78 Years R/o Station Road, Indira Gandhi, House No. 271, Ward No. 9 Janta Colony, Gudhiyari Raipur, Chhattisgarh

¶11

7 - Shri Swaraj Sawarkar, S/o Shravan Sawarkar, Aged About 73 Years R/o Ward No. 24 Raja Talab, Gandhi Chowk, Raipur, Chhattisgarh

¶12

8 - Shri Ripusudan Lal Soni S/o Rambhau Soni Aged About 67 Years R/o Ward No. 14, Dalhanpara, Kosmandi, Baloda Bazar, Chhattisgarh.

¶13

9 - Shri Dev Lal Sahu S/o Khadak Ram Sahu Aged About 71 Years R/o Durg Road, Ratnabandha, Ward No. 37, Dhamtari, Chhattisgarh.

¶14

10 - Shri Parmanand Sharma S/o Ram Lal Sharma Aged About 68 Years R/o Kharenga, Ward No. 09, Dhamtari, Chhattisgarh.

¶15

11 - Shri Bharat Lal Sahu S/o Jhadu Ram Aged About 64 Years R/o Talab Para, Ward 37, Dhamtari Chhattisgarh.

¶16

12 - Smt. Vasumati Sharma W/o Nand Kishor Sharma Aged About 63 Years R/o Aama Talab Road, Banspara Ward. 30 Dhamtari, Chhattisgarh.

¶17

13 - Smt. Mamta Babar W/o Anil Babar Aged About 68 Years R/o H. No. 91 Maratha Para Ward No. 29, Dhamtari Chhattisgarh.

¶18

PARUL MITTAL Digitally signed by PARUL MITTAL Date: 2026.01.06 10:49:03 +0530

¶19

¶20

14 - Smt. Usha Soni W/o Late Gorelal Soni Aged About 71 Years R/o 78, Akash Ganga Colony, Rudri Road, Dhamtari, Chhattisgarh.

¶21

15 - Smt. Bidami Jain W/o Pukhraj Jain Aged About 75 Years R/o Brahaman Para, Sadar Bazar, Dhamtari Chhattisgarh.

¶22

16 - Smt. A.M. Andriyas Aged About 71 Years R/o Risai Para Ward No. 16, Dhamtari, Chhattisgarh.

¶23

... Petitioner(s)

¶24

versus

¶25

1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Secretary Department Of School Education, Mantralaya, Mahanadi Bhawan, Atal Nagar, New Raipur, Chhattisgarh.

¶26

2 - The Director, Directorate Of Public Instructions, Jashpur, Chhattisgarh.

¶27

3 - District Education Officer, District - Jashpur, Having Its Office At Purani Toli, Jashpur Chhattisgarh.

¶28

... Respondent(s)

¶29

For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Sharad Mishra, Adv For Respondent(s) : Mr. Rohitashva Singh, Dy. G. A.

¶30

(Hon’ble Shri Justice Sachin Singh Rajput)

¶31

Order on Board

¶32

05/01/2026

¶33

Following relief(s) has been claimed in this writ petition:-

¶34

(1) That, this Hon'ble Court may kindly be enough to call for the records of case of the petitioners from the respondents.

¶35

(2) That, this Hon'ble Court may be kind enough to allow the present writ petition by issuing appropriate writ/ direction including the writ of mandamus and directing the respondents to extend the benefits of the pension to the petitioners in the interest of justice.

¶36

(3) That, this Hon'ble Court may be kind enough to issue appropriate writ/ order/ direction including the writ of mandamus directing the respondents particularly respondent No. 1 to provide grant in aid to the institution of the petitioners for payment of special grant for pension to the petitioners in the interest of justice.

¶37

(4) Any other relief which this Hon'ble Court deems fit and proper may also kindly be granted to the petitioners, in the interest of justice.

¶38

¶39

Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the petitioners who were working with the Government aided Educational Institutions are seeking the above stated relief(s). He further submits that the service condition of the petitioners are at per with the Government employees. Therefore, this writ petition has been filed.

¶40

Opposing the submissions, learned counsel for the respondent/ State submits that the issue involved in this writ petition has come up before this Court in WPS No. 2789 of 2017 and other connected matters and the Hon’ble Court has dismissed those writ petitions having identical issue involved.

¶41

This preposition could not be disputed by learned counsel for the petitioners.

¶42

In view of the above, this Court in WPS No.2789 of 2017 observed as thus:-

¶43

“Having considered the entire facts and circumstances of the case, this Court is of the considered view that in absence of particular rules, the State cannot be directed to make rules by extending the pensionary benefits to the retired teachers/ employees of the aided schools at par with the teachers/ employees of the State Government.

¶44

In the result, all the petitions sans substratum, are liable to be and are hereby dismissed. No order as to cost(s).”

¶45

Since the issue raised in this writ petition has already been dealt with and decided

¶46

against the petitioners therein in WPS No. 2789 of 2017. Therefore, the present writ petition is also dismissed in light of the order passed in WPS No.2789 of 2017.

¶47

Sd/-

¶48

(Sachin Singh Rajput)

¶49

Judge

¶50

Parul

Smt. Kanti Baghel v. State of Chhattisgarh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Smt. Kanti Baghel v. State of Chhattisgarh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Smt. Shyama Laxman Vs State Of Chhattisgarh

Balwant Singh Vs the State of Chhattisgarh

Lekhram Chandrakar Vs Lomnarayan Chandrakar (Died) through Lrs

Balaram Uke Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Firat Ram Kenwat Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Chief General Manager Vs The President Rastriya Colliery and Anr.