G. S. Tiwari Vs State of Chhattisgarh

¶1

1

¶2

2026:CGHC:8612

¶3

NAFR

¶4

HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR

¶5

WPS No. 6376 of 2021

¶6

1 - G. S. Tiwari S/o Late Shri Harprasad Tiwari Aged About 69 Years R/o Village Dhangaon, Post Andhiyarkhor, Tehsil Bemetara, District Bemetara Chhattisgarh.

¶7

2 - Lakhan Lal Tondre S/o Bhav Prasad Aged About 62 Years R/o Village Charbhata, Post Dholiya, Tehsil Bemetara, District Bemetara Chhattisgarh., District : Bemetara, Chhattisgarh

¶8

3 - Sundar Lal Patil S/o Hinsaram Aged About 66 Years R/o Village Sahaspur, Ward No. 18, District Bemetara Chhattisgarh., District : Bemetara, Chhattisgarh

¶9

... Petitioner(s)

¶10

versus

¶11

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

¶12

Digitally signed by PREETI PREETI KUMARI KUMARI Date: 2026.02.27 11:26:10 +0530

¶13

2 - Chief Engineer Water Resources Department, Sector 19, Atal Nagar, Naya Raipur, District Raipur Chhattisgarh., District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh

¶14

3 - Executive Engineer Water Resources Department, Division Bemetara District Bemetara Chhattisgarh., District : Bemetara, Chhattisgarh

¶15

4 - Collector Bemetara, District Bemetara Chhattisgarh., District : Bemetara, Chhattisgarh

¶16

2

¶17

5 - Joint Director Treasury, Accounts, And Pension, Division, Durg, District Durg Chhattisgarh., District : Durg, Chhattisgarh

¶18

---- Respondent(s)

¶19

For Petitioner(s) :Mr. Sanjay Patel, Advocate. For Respondents No. 1 to 5: : Mr. Suyash Dhar Badgaiyan, G.A.

¶20

Hon’ble Shri Sachin Singh Rajput, Judge

¶21

Order on Board

¶22

17. 02. 2026

¶23

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

¶24

10.1 It is therefore prayed that this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to call for the entire records pertaining to the impugned order Annexure P/5.

¶25

10.2 That this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to issue an appropriate writ or order and while setting aside the order dated 15.07.2021 passed by respondent no.1 (Annexure P/5), direct the respondents to determine the pension of the petitioners as per Pension Rules 1979 counting the services of the petitioners from initial date of joining the service.

¶26

10.3 Any other relief which this Hon'ble Court may deem fit.

¶27

2. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the petitioner No. 1 was appointed on 22.11.1974, regularized on 01.09.1989 and retired on 31.03.2011. The petitioner No. 2 was appointed on 09.01.1975, regularized on 30.08.1989 and retired on 30.05.2020. The petitioner No. 3

¶28

3

¶29

was appointed on 26.06.1976, regularized on 01.08.2007 and retired on 31.07.2016. 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 their regularization. He further submits that while gratuity was paid by also counting the period served by them as daily wagers, no such benefit was granted to the petitioners with regard to their pension and leave encashment. Consequently, the present writ petition has been filed seeking the aforesaid relief.

¶30

3. Learned counsel for the respondents submits that the core issue involved in this writ petition 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.86778678/ 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 petitioner 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 this writ petition may also be disposed of in light of order passed by this Court.

¶31

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

¶32

"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. 8677-8678/2023

¶33

4

¶34

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 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.

¶35

5. Thus, this writ petition is also disposed of in terms of order passed in WPS No. 10696/2019.

¶36

6. All pending applications stand disposed of.

¶37

Sd/-

¶38

(Sachin Singh Rajput) Judge

¶39

Preeti

G. S. Tiwari v. State of Chhattisgarh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

G. S. Tiwari 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

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Nilesh Saluja Vs Kanchan Motwani

Jaipal Nirala Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Baratu Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Sunil Kotadiya Vs Veer Kotadiya

Shri Ram Transport Finance Company Limited Vs Shri Gupt Narayan Jaiswal

Sonsai Baghel Vs State of Chhattisgarh