[Cites 2, Cited by 0]
Chattisgarh High Court
Shri Satish Kumar Sahu vs State Of Chhattisgarh on 30 March, 2026
1/4
2026:CGHC:14796
NAFR
PAWAN
KUMAR
JHA
HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR
Digitally signed
by PAWAN
KUMAR JHA
WPS No. 7307 of 2024
• Shri Satish Kumar Sahu S/o Barati Ram Sahu Aged About 66 Years R/o
Bihav Bod, Post Baghera, Police Station Ghumka, District Rajnandgaon
Chhattisgarh.
... Petitioner
Versus
1. State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Secretary, Department Of Panchayat And
Rural Development, Mantralaya, Mahanadi Bhawan, Atal Nagar, Nava
Raipur, District Raipur Chhattisgarh.
2. The Collector Rajnandgaon, District Rajnandgaon Chhattisgarh.
3. Chief Executive Officer Zila Panchayat Rajnandgaon, District Rajnandgaon
Chhattisgarh.
4. Chief Executive Officer Janpad Panchayat Rajnandgaon, District
Rajnandgaon Chhattisgarh.
... Respondents
For Petitioner : Mr. Hemant Kesharwani, Advocate
For Respondents-State : Mr. Hariom Rai, Panel Lawyer
For Respondent No. 3 & 4 : Mr. Shaleen Singh Baghel, Advocate
S.B. Hon'ble Shri Justice Parth Prateem Sahu
Order On Board
30/03/2026
1. Today this case is listed on default for non-compliance of the order
dated 22.03.2025 of not paying process fee for issuance of notice to
Respondent No. 4 and also not filing application for condonation of
delay in payment of process fee.
2. Mr. Shaleen Singh Baghel, learned counsel has caused appearance on
behalf of Respondents No. 3 & 4 and therefore there is no requirement
of issuance of notice to these respondents and accordingly default(s)
as pointed out by the Registry is overruled.
3. Petitioner has filed this petition seeking following relief (s) :-
"10.1 This Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to
call for entire records from the office of the
respondent in respect of petitioner's claim.
10.2 The Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to
direct the respondents No. 3 & 4 to pay gratuity
amount with interest.
10.3 The Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to
direct the Respondent No. 2 to recover gratuity
amount as per order 20.10.2023 passed by
controlling authority from respondent No. 3 & 4."
4. Learned counsel for petitioner submits that petitioner while working as
panchayat karmi/ Panchayat Secretary stood retired from service after
attaining age of superannuation on 31.05.2020. On the date of his
superannuation he was getting salary of Rs. 31,064 per month,
however, petitioner was not paid the amount of gratuity. Aggrieved with
which, petitioner submitted an application under Section 7 of the
Payment of Gratuity Act, 1972 (henceforth called as "Act of 1972")
before Controlling Authority under the Act of 1972. The application
submitted by petitioner was allowed and the gratuity of sum of Rs.
4,30,116 has been computed to be paid to petitioner along with interest
@ 10% from 30.05.2020 till its realization. When the amount as
computed by the Controlling Authority is not paid to petitioner or
deposited with the concerned authority, petitioner submitted an
application under Section 8 of the Act of 1972. After receipt of
application under Section 8, the Controlling Authority wrote letter to
Respondent No. 2 for recovery of amount of gratuity computed as land
revenue. The letter was written on 05.07.2024, however, till date the
Collector has not concluded the proceedings in terms of Section 8 of
the Act of 1972.
5. Learned counsel for Respondents No. 3 & 4 would submit that
according to his instructions after receipt of letter from the Controlling
Authority, Collector/ Respondent No. 2 wrote letter to Director,
Panchayat Department on 23.07.2024 for providing funds.
6. Learned State counsel also adopts the submission made by learned
counsel for Respondents No. 3 & 4 and made similar submission.
7. I have heard learned counsel for the parties.
8. Along with writ petition, petitioner has also enclosed copy of letter
dated 28.09.2013 issued by the Secretary, State of Chhatisgarh,
Panchayat and Rural Development Department in which there is
specific direction issued for making payment of gratuity to the retired
employees and the liability of the same is upon the employer. In the
case at hand, Respondents No. 3 & 4 are the employer. It is for the
Collector to comply with the directives issued by the Controlling
Authority under the provisions of Section 8 of the Act of 1972.
9. When there is specific order of the Controlling Authority of Recovery
Revenue Certificate (RRC) in favour of petitioner. Collector is not to
adjudicate the matter but is only required to comply with the letter
issued by the Controlling Authority under the provisions of Section 8 of
the Act of 1972. In the facts of the case, where the Controlling Authority
has issued a letter to Collector on 05.07.2024 but even after lapse of
nine months proceedings have not been concluded, this writ petition at
this stage is disposed of directing Respondent No. 2 to conclude
proceedings as forwarded to him by the Controlling Authority under
Section 8 of the Act of 1972, in accordance with law, expeditiously
preferably within a further period of 04 months from the date of receipt
of order passed by this Court.
10. With the aforesaid observation and direction, this writ petition is
disposed of.
Sd/-
(Parth Prateem Sahu)
Judge
pwn
