Chattisgarh High Court
Sushil Kumar Tiwari vs State Of Chhattisgarh on 13 September, 2021
1
NAFR
HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR
WRIT PETITION (S) NO. 4379 OF 2021
1. Sushil Kumar Tiwari, S/o Shri Siddh Gopal Tiwari, aged about 60
years, Occupation Principal, Chhattisgarh Higher Secondary School,
Bilaspur (CG). R/o Sharma Vihar Radhagopal Sadan, Khamtarai Road,
Sarkanda, Bilaspur, Police Station Sarkanda, District Bilaspur (CG)
2. Lokesh Kumar Shukla, S/o Shri Ramadhar Shukla, aged about 60
years, Occupation Lecturer/U.D.T., Chhattisgarh Higher Secondary
School, Bilaspur (CG). R/o School Campus, Chhattisgarh Higher
Secondary School, Bilaspur (CG)
3. Dileep Kumar Yadav, S/o Shri Vedram Yadav, aged about 61 years,
Occupation Lecturer/U.D.T., Chhattisgarh Higher Secondary School,
Bilaspur (CG). R/o Joratalab Road, Gali No.05, Sarkanda, Bilaspur District
Bilaspur (CG)
... Petitioners
versus
1. State of Chhattisgarh, through the Secretary, General
Administration Department, Mahanadi Bhawan, Mantralaya, Atal Nagar,
Nawa Raipur, District Raipur (CG)
2. The Secretary, Department of School Education, Mantralaya,
Mahanadi Bhawan, Atal Nagar, Nawa Raipur, District Raipur (CG)
3. Director, Directorate of Public Instructions, Indrawati Bhawan,
Mantralaya, Naya Raipur, District Raipur (CG)
4. Chief Secretary, Finance, Finance Department, Mantralaya, Naya
Raipur, District Raipur (CG)
5. Joint Director, Public Instructions, Bilaspur Division, District Bilaspur
(CG)
6. District Education Officer, Bilaspur, District Bilaspur (CG)
7. Manager/Management Committee, Chhattisgarh Higher Secondary
School, Bilaspur, District Bilaspur (CG)
... Respondents
For Petitioners : Mr. Abdul Wahab Khan, Advocate.
For Respondent-State : Mr. Suyash Dhar, Panel Lawyer.
Hon'ble Shri Justice P. Sam Koshy
Order on Board
[13/09/2021]
1. Grievance of Petitioner is the non-granting of gratuity under the
Payment of Gratuity Act and also for non-consideration of the claim for
pensionary benefits.
2. Learned Counsel for Petitioner submits that the Petitioner was
working on the post of Upper Division Teacher under Respondent No.7, a
private School, which receives 100% granting aid from the State
Government and thus the Petitioner would be entitled for all that which
were applicable in the case of State Government. According to learned
Counsel for Petitioner, the Petitioner has not received the gratuity and also
not received any pensionary benefits.
3. Learned Counsel for Petitioner relies upon Annexure P-2 which is a
judgment/order delivered by this Court on 6.3.2020 partly allowing the
bunch of Writ Petitions, leading case of which is W.P.(L) No.223/2017.
4. Plain perusal of Annexure P-2 would establish the fact that the claim
settled by this Court in the said Writ Petitions is that which arose from the
order passed by the Controlling Authority under the Payment of Gratuity
Act.
5. Accordingly, the present Writ Petition also so far as the claim of
Petitioner for payment of gratuity is concerned stands disposed of
permitting the Petitioner to approach the concerned Controlling Authority
under the Payment of Gratuity Act for redressal of his grievances in this
regard.
6. As regards the payment of pension, the present Writ Petition at this
juncture stands disposed of directing Respondent No.2, 3 & 5 to take
appropriate decision on the claim of Petitioner for grant of pension, subject
to due verification of the entitlement part and also considering the services
that Petitioner has rendered under Respondent No.7 which is a private
School.
7. Let appropriate decision so far as the pension is concerned be
taken by Respondents No.2, 3 & 5, at the earliest, preferably within a
period of 90 days from the date of receipt of copy of this Order.
8. Writ Petition accordingly stands disposed of. Sd/-
(P. Sam Koshy)
/sharad/ Judge
