Chintadaman Singh Senger vs State Of Chhattisgarh

Citation : 2022 Latest Caselaw 6960 Chatt
Judgement Date : 18 November, 2022

Chattisgarh High Court
Chintadaman Singh Senger vs State Of Chhattisgarh on 18 November, 2022
                                    1

                                                                    NAFR
             HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR

                           WA No. 550 of 2022
Chintadaman Singh Senger S/o Late Chaturbhuj Singh Senger Aged
About 62 Years Retd. Stenographer, District And Sessions Court Durg, R/
o Anand Vihar Phase Iii, Block Ii, House No.8, Near Pk Fitness, Borsi,
Durg, District : Durg, Chhattisgarh

                                                             ---- Appellant

                                 Versus

1.   State of Chhattisgarh Through The Principal Secretary, Department
     of Law And Legislative Affairs Mahanadi Bhawan, Atal Nagar New
     Raipur, District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh

2.   District And Session Judge Durg District And Session Judge Office,
     District : Durg, Chhattisgarh

                                                         ---- Respondents

(Cause-title taken from Case Information System) For Appellant : Mr. Anuroop Panda, Advocate For Respondent No.1 : Mr. Gagan Tiwari, Deputy Govt. Advocate Hon'ble Shri Arup Kumar Goswami, Chief Justice Hon'ble Shri Sanjay Agrawal, Judge Judgment on Board Per Arup Kumar Goswami, Chief Justice 18.11.2022 Heard Mr. Anuroop Panda, learned counsel for the appellant. Also heard Mr. Gagan Tiwari, learned Deputy Government Advocate, appearing for respondent No.1.

2. This appeal is presented against an order dated 06.09.2022 passed by the learned Single Judge in Writ Petition (S) No.3801 of 2022. 2

3. The writ petitioner was a Stenographer in the Court of District and Sessions Judge, Durg. He superannuated on 30.06.2021. The gratuity amount, amounting to Rs.14,82,096/-, and a sum of Rs.2,24,560/-, which Mr. Panda submits was pension amount, were credited to the account of the writ petitioner on 09.12.2021. The writ application was filed by the writ petitioner claiming interest at the rate of 18% from 01.07.2021 to 09.12.2021.

4. The learned Single Judge in the impugned order noted that dues had been paid to the writ petitioner after a complaint filed against the writ petitioner was closed on 18.08.2021 (wrongly written as 18.08.2022) and the amount having been paid within reasonable period of time from 18.08.2021, there is no merit in the application.

5. We agree with the view taken by the learned Single Judge, and accordingly, writ appeal is dismissed. No cost.

                       Sd/-                                        Sd/-
               (Arup Kumar Goswami)                         (Sanjay Agrawal)
                    Chief Justice                                 Judge
Anu