Latel Singh Thakur vs State Of Chhattisgarh
2021 Latest Caselaw 1582 Chatt

                                      -1-




                                                                           NAFR
             HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR

                           WPS No. 3980 of 2021
  1. Latel Singh Thakur S/o Late Chhabil Singh Thakur Aged About 68 Years
     R/o Village Pratappur Tahsil- Nawagarh, District- Bemetara (Chhattisgarh)

  2. Mohan Lal Rajput S/o Narsingh Rajput Aged About 67 Years R/o Village
     Gadaghat, Tahsil- Khamhriya, Distt.- Bemetara (Chhattisgarh)

  3. Basant Kumar Verma S/o Jageshwar Prashad Aged About 63 Years R/o
     Village Devada, Tahsil Patan, District Durg (Chhattisgarh)

  4. P.K. Kaushik S/o Ramnuj Kaushik Aged About 65 Years R/o Village -
     Amora, Tahsil- Nawagarh, District - Bemetara (Chhattisgarh)

                                                                  ---- Petitioners

                                   Versus

  1. State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Secretary, Water Resources
     Department, Mahanadi Bhawan Atal Nagar Raipur (Chhattisgarh)

  2. Chief   Engineer   Mahanadi     Godawari     Kachhar,   Water     Resources
     Department Raipur, District - Raipur (Chhattisgarh)

  3. Sub Divisional Officer Water Resources Department, Sub Divisional
     Nawagarh, District Bemetara, Chhattisgarh.

  4. Executive Engineer Water Resources Department Division- Bemetara,
     District - Bemetara (Chhattisgarh)

  5. Joint Direction Pension And Accounts Treasury Department, Durg, Distt.
     Durg (Chhattisgarh)                                     ---Respondents

For Petitioners : Shri Hemant Kesharwani, Advocate For State : Shri Ayaz Naved, G.A.

Hon'ble Shri Justice P. Sam Koshy Order on Board

05/08/2021

1. The default pointed out by the Registry as of now stands ignored.

2. The relief sought for by the petitioners in the present writ petition is

for grant of pensionary benefits by counting the services rendered by

the petitioners as contingency paid /daily wage employee.

3. Counsel for the petitioners relies upon the judgment passed by this

Court in the case of Lakhan Ram Sahu V. State of Chhattisgarh and

Ors., in W.A. No. 281 of 2013 decided on 26.02.2015 in support of

his contention.

4. This Court in the past have also disposed of many cases of similar

nature directing the respondents to consider the case of the

petitioners for grant of pension counting the earlier services rendered

by the petitioners as daily wage employees under the contingency

establishment for the purpose of quantifying the pension amount in-

terms of the Pension Rules governing the field of contingency paid

employee. In the instant case also Annexure P/1 shows that the

services of the petitioners have been regularized under the

contingency paid establishment and the rules applicable to

contingency paid employee.

5. Subject to verification of the factual matrix of the case, the present

writ petition as of now stands disposed of directing the respondent-

authorities to consider the case of each of the petitioners for

counting their services rendered as daily wage employee and also

for the purpose of counting the total length of service for determining

the pensionary benefits payable to the petitioner in-terms of the

judgment of this Court in the case of Lakhan Ram Sahu (Supra).

6. Let an appropriate decision on due scrutiny and subject to

verification of fact is done by the respondents so far as deciding the

actual retiral dues & pensionary benefits payable to the petitioners at

the earliest preferably within a period of four months from the date of

receipt of copy of this order.

7. The writ petition accordingly stands disposed of.

Sd/-

(P. Sam Koshy) Judge

J-