Chhattisgarh High Court

WPS/7612/2007 of PARANU SATNAMI and 1 OTHER Vs STATE OF CHHATTISGARH and ORS. on 20 December 2007

CHHATTISGARH. BILASPUR No. 7612 of 2007 1. Paraau Sataami, s/o SIui Duldiu Satnami, aged about 61 years, workiag as Gangiuau, Dept. of P.W.D., N.H.No.216, Raigarh, R/o Viilage Godam., Tali.sil SaraiLgarh, Distt. Raigarli (C.G). 2. Rikhi Ram. Yadav, s/o Shri Molian Yadav, aged about 61 years,

HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH. BILASPUR

No. 7612 of 2007

1. Paraau Sataami, s/o SIui DuldiuSatnami,agedabout61years,workiagasGangiuau,Dept.ofP.W.D., N.H.No.216, Raigarh, R/oViilage Godam., Tali.sil SaraiLgarh,Distt. Raigarli (C.G).2.Rikhi Ram. Yadav, s/o Shri MolianYadav,agedabout61years,workuigasGangman,DeptofP.W.D., N.H.No.216, Raigarh (C.G),R/ovillageBarhaguda,Distt.Janjgir (C.G).Versus RESPONDENTS1.State of Chliattisgarh, through fheSecretary,PubUcWorksDepartment,Mantralaya,D.K.S.Bhavan, Raipur(C.G-)2.TheExecutiveEngineer NationalHighway Division, Bilaspur, Distt.Bilaspur (C.G).3.The Sub-Divisional Officer, PubUcWorks Departmeut, National HighWay Sub-Division, Raigarh., Distt.Raigarh (C.G).

WMT PBTITION UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF THS

Shri R.S. Patel, Counsel for the petitioners.Shri Ajay Dwivedi, Panel Lawyer, tbr the State/respondents on advaacecopy.

(20.12.2007)

SUNIL KUMAR SINHA, J.

Heai-d.

Learuedcounsel for fhepetitionerssubinitsfb.at apermaaent Gang-iuan is to be i-etired at the age of 62 years inaccordancewithfheChhattisgarhShaskiyaSevak(Adhivarshiki-Ayu) Adhiniyam 1967 i^ad with FundamentalRiiles, 56. He also subiuits that the poiat raised has beendecided by this Court m batch ofmatters i.e. W.P. No. 108/2005

Rao

aad inany other coiuiected niatters on 04.01.2007, reported ia2007 f2) C.G.L.J. 29 IGooina.Ss^iOiers vs. State ofC.G. andothers) and fhis xuatter is squarely covered by fhat decision,which inay be disposed ofon the same terms.

Leamed counsel for fhe State fairly agrees that fhisraatter is covered by the said decision.However, he subinitsfhat ia. some matters fhe State has filed writ appeals.

Unless soiae interim order is passed, nierely on accouatof filmg of fhe writ appeal, hearing of fhis writ petition caruiotbe kept ru abeyance, when the m.atter is squarely covered by thesaid judgnient.

In the result, fhis petition is aUowed.It is disposed of ia tenns of the order dated 04.01.2007passed tu W.P. No. 108/2005 aud oth.er coiinected inatters. No!order as to cost.Sd/-

Page 1 of 1

Loading citations and judicial treatment…

You have used today's free searches. Sign in, for free, to keep searching without a limit.

Compass reads the judgments for you and finds the paragraphs for and against your question. Sign in to use it.

My Vault follows judgments for you and records every later decision that cites them. Sign in to keep one.

Sign in to download the court's PDF. The full text stays free to read here.

Search and read Indian judgments without limits, save them to My Vault and find the relevant paragraphs with Compass.

Open the sign-in page instead