Allowed

Rajendra Kumar Chaube v. State of Chhattisgarh

Chhattisgarh HC15 Sept 2026WPS/7299/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Justice Bibhu Datta Guru dismissed the writ petition? No, he granted relief. The court held that pending ministerial approval for post-retirement departmental proceedings does not justify withholding retiral dues. The High Court directed the State to fix pension, pay arrears, and release 100% pension with 12% interest within 50 days.

What did the court decide?

Respondents directed to fix pension, pay arrears (gratuity, leave encashment, pay scale), release 100% pension, and pay 12% interest within 50 days.

Rajendra Kumar Chaube Vs State of… — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Chhattisgarh HC (2026)

¶1

¶2

SOURABH BHILWAR

¶3

Digitally signed by SOURABH BHILWAR Date: 2026.09.17 17:40:38 +0530

CGHC010281242025

2026:CGHC:40455

NAFR

HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR

¶8

WPS No. 7299 of 2025

¶9

Rajendra Kumar Chaube S/o Shri B.R. Sharma Aged About 68 Years R/o 682, Adarsh Chowk, Sunder Nagar, Raipur District Raipur Chhattisgarh

¶10

... Petitioner

¶11

versus

¶12

1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Secretary, Public Health Engineering Department, Mantralaya, Indrawati Bhawan, Naya Raipur, Atal Nagar, District Raipur Chhattisgarh

¶13

2 - Engineer In Chief, Public Health Engineering Department, Naya Raipur, Atal Nagar, District Raipur Chhattisgarh

¶14

3 - Chief Engineer Raipur, Public Health Engineering Department, Indravati Bhawan, Naya Raipur, Atal Nagar, District Raipur Chhattisgarh

¶15

4 - Municipal Corporation Raipur, Through The Commissioner Raipur District Raipur Chhattisgarh

¶16

... Respondents

¶17

(Cause title is taken from Case Information System)

¶18

For Petitioner	: Mr. Prateek Sharma, Advocate
For Respondents/State	: Ms. Vartika Shrivastava, Panel Lawyer
For Respondent No.4	: Mr. Pankaj Agrawal, Advocate

¶19

¶20

(HON’BLE SHRI JUSTICE BIBHU DATTA GURU) Order on Board

¶21

16/09/2026

¶22

By the present writ petition, the petitioner is seeking for the following reliefs :-

¶23

“10.1 That, this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to call for the entire records of the case from the respondents.

¶24

10.2 That, this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to direct the respondents to grant third time bound pay scale to the petitioner from the date of his entitlement and fix the pay scale accordingly and pay the arrears with 12% compound annual interest from the date of accrual to the date of payment in the interest of justice.

¶25

10.3 That, this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to direct the respondents to fix revised pay scale of petitioner according to 7^th pay scale and arrears be paid to the petitioner with 12% compound annual interest from the date of accrual to the date of payment in the interest of justice.

¶26

10.4 That, this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to direct the respondents to fix the pension properly and pay all due amount of pension, gratuity, leave encashment and other retiral benefits, with 12% compound annual interest from 31.12.2019 to the date of payment and also be pleased to direct the respondents to pay 100% pension to petitioner continuously till his lifetime, in the interest of justice.

¶27

10.5 That, any other relief/order which may deem fit and just in the facts and circumstances of the casein the interest of justice including award of the costs of the petition may be given.”

¶28

¶29

Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that the petitioner, a retired Superintending Engineer of the Public Health Engineering Department, retired on 31.12.2019 after rendering more than 31 years of service, having received only two promotions and without grant of the third time-bound pay scale/Kramonnati. He submits that despite issuance of NOCs by the concerned authorities and there being no pending departmental enquiry, the petitioner has not been paid his complete pensionary and retiral benefits, including gratuity, leave encashment, arrears of 7^th Pay Commission and third time-bound pay scale. He further submits that the petitioner has made several representations in this regard, but no effective action has been taken till date. He, therefore, prays for appropriate directions for fixation and release of the aforesaid dues along with consequential benefits.

¶30

On the last date of hearing, this Court had directed the Secretary, Public Health Engineering Department, to file an affidavit explaining as to under which law or provision the retirement dues of the petitioner have been withheld by the State Government, particularly when neither any order of recovery has been passed nor any departmental enquiry has been initiated against the petitioner.

¶31

In compliance with the aforesaid direction, the Secretary, Public Health Engineering Department, has filed an affidavit. Learned State counsel, by referring to the said affidavit, submits that a show-cause notice had been issued to the petitioner and the

¶32

¶33

proceedings could not be finalized before the petitioner’s retirement. She further submits that, thereafter, approval was sought for initiation of departmental proceedings after retirement and the matter is presently pending consideration before the concerned Minister.

¶34

At this juncture, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that although the petitioner retired in the year 2019, except for pension, GPF, GIS and leave encashment, the remaining retiral dues, including gratuity and complete pensionary benefits, have not been released to him till date. He, therefore, prays that the respondents be directed to properly fix the pensionary benefits of the petitioner in accordance with law and release the remaining pensionary dues and gratuity, along with interest at the rate of 12% per annum from the date of his retirement, i.e. 31.12.2019.

¶35

I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the documents appended with the writ petition.

¶36

Having considered the submissions made by learned counsel for the parties and having perused the affidavit filed by the Secretary, Public Health Engineering Department, it would be apposite to reproduce paragraph 7 of the said affidavit, wherein the respondents have explained the reason for withholding the retiral dues of the petitioner. Paragraph 7 reads as under:

¶37

“7. That, with respect to withholding of the retiral dues of the petitioner, it is most respectfully submitted that, a

¶38

¶39

show-cause notice was issued to the petitioner and the proceedings could not be finalized before the petitioner's retirement. Thereafter, as per the provisions of finance instruction No.09/2017, in cases of Departmental Enquiry to be constituted after retirement of a Government servant, the permission would be required from the concerned Minister and then the Hon'ble Chief Minister in coordination. A copy of finance

¶40

instruction dated 02.03.2017 is annexed as ANNEXURE-A/4. Consequently, the approval was sought from the Public Service Commission and the same was granted on 11.11.2025. A copy of letter dated 11.11.2025 is annexed as ANNEXURE-A/5. Thereafter, the file has been put up for approval of the concerned Minister and the same is pending consideration.”

¶41

A perusal of the aforesaid paragraph makes it clear that, as on date, no departmental enquiry has been concluded against the petitioner and the proposal for initiating departmental proceedings after his retirement is still pending consideration before the concerned Minister. Thus, the respondents have not been able to point out any concluded departmental proceeding or order of recovery against the petitioner on the basis of which his retiral dues could be withheld. Mere issuance of a show-cause notice prior to retirement, followed by pendency of a proposal for initiating departmental proceedings after retirement, cannot by itself justify withholding of the petitioner’s retiral dues indefinitely.

¶42

¶43

In view of the foregoing and having considered the entire facts and circumstances of the case, the respondents are directed to properly fix the pensionary benefits of the petitioner in accordance with law and release the admissible amount of gratuity and the remaining 100% pensionary benefits to the petitioner within a period of 50 days from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. The respondents shall also pay interest at the rate of 12% per annum on the delayed payment of the aforesaid retiral dues, as per his entitlement.

¶44

With the aforesaid observations and directions, the writ petition stands disposed of.

¶45

Sd/- (BIBHU DATTA GURU) Judge

¶46

$. Bhilwar

Rajendra Kumar Chaube v. State of Chhattisgarh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Rajendra Kumar Chaube v. State of Chhattisgarh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases