Chhattisgarh High Court
WPS/7133/2026 of SMT. PARVATI SAMBHAKAR Vs STATE OF CHHATTISGARH on 11 October 2026
2026:CGHC:44095 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPS No. 7133 of 2026 Smt. Parvati Sambhakar W/o Shobha Ram Sambhakar. Aged About 65 Years R/o Adhari Nawagaon, Ward No. 8, Dhamtari, Distt- Dhamtari (C.G.) ... Petitioner(s) versus 1. State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Principal
CGHC010357862026
2026:CGHC:44095
NAFR
HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR
WPS No. 7133 of 2026
Smt. Parvati Sambhakar W/o Shobha Ram Sambhakar. Aged About 65
Years R/o Adhari Nawagaon, Ward No. 8, Dhamtari, Distt- Dhamtari
(C.G.)
... Petitioner(s)
versus
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
0
Decisions referred to
In this index
0
Of the decisions it cites
Overruled / Questioned
0
No negative treatment found
Loading the citing and cited decisions…
This judgment in the centre: on the left the decisions it cites, on the right the decisions citing it. Colour is the treatment; choose a decision to open it.
1. State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Principal Secretary, Public Works Department, Mantralaya, Naya Raipur, Distt- Raipur (C.G.)
2. The Executive Engineer, Public Works Department, Khairagarh, Distt- Khairagarh Chhuikhadan Gandai (C.G.)
3. The Divisional Joint Director, Treasury, Accounts And Pension Distt- Raipur (C.G.)
... Respondent(s) For Petitioner : Mr. Sunil Pillai, Advocate (through V.C.) For Respondents/ State : Mr. Soumitra Kesharwani, P.L. Hon’ble Shri Bibhu Datta Guru, Judge Order on Board 12/10/2026
1. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner's husband, who was working as an Assistant Engineer in the Public Works Department, retired from service on 30.06.2001 and was receiving regular pension till his demise on 10.01.2023. It is contended that despite the lapse of approximately 43 months since the death of her husband, the respondents have failed to release the family pension payable to the petitioner. Learned counsel submits that such inaction on the part of the respondents is arbitrary and illegal.
2. On the previous date of hearing, learned State counsel was granted time to seek instructions regarding the reasons for non- commencement of family pension in favour of the petitioner. Today, on instructions, learned State counsel submits that the petitioner's name was not recorded in the Pension Payment Order (PPO), resulting in the delay. However, upon noticing the aforesaid defect, necessary steps have been initiated to incorporate the petitioner's name in the PPO. He further submits that the requisite steps shall be completed and the family pension shall be released in favour of the petitioner within a period of one month.
3. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the records.
4. In view of the submission made by learned State counsel, the writ petition is disposed of with a direction to the competent authority to take necessary steps for incorporation of the petitioner's name in the PPO and ensure release of the family pension in her favour within a period of one month from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.
5. Accordingly, the writ petition stands disposed of.
SD/- (Bibhu Datta Guru)
JUDGE Jyoti