Chintadaman Singh Senger vs State Of Chhattisgarh
2022 Latest Caselaw 6960 Chatt

                                    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.

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