1 - Archana Mahobe W/o Anup Kumar Mahobe Aged About 56 Years 88 Rda v. 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through Secretary, Department Of Urban Administration And Development, Mahanadi
Case Details
1 2025:CGHC:48554 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPS No. 8207 of 2022 1 - Archana Mahobe W/o Anup Kumar Mahobe Aged About 56 Years 88 Rda Colony, Tikrapara, Raipur District Raipur, Chhattisgarh - 492001 --- Petitioner(s) versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through Secretary, Department Of Urban Administration And Development, Mahanadi Bhawan, Atal Nagar Nava Raipur Revenue And Civil District Raipur, Chhattisgarh 2 - Director Directorate Of Urban Administration And Development, Indravati Bhawan, Atal Nagar Nava Raipur Revenue And Civil District Raipur, District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh 3 - Commissioner Municipal Corporation - Raipur, District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh --- Respondent(s) & WPS No. 8975 of 2022 1 - Mohinder Kaur Bhuie W/o Gyan Singh Aged About 50 Years R/o Behind New Gurudwara, Mauli Para, Telibhandha, Amalidih, Raipur, District- Raipur, Chhattisgarh. 492006 --- Petitioner(s) 2 versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through Secretary, Department Of Urban Administration And Development, Mahanadi Bhawan, Atal Nagar Nava Raipur, Revenue And Civil District- Raipur, Chhattisgarh. 2 - Director Directorate Of Urban Administration And Development, Indravati Bhawan, Atal Nagar Nava Raipur, Revenue And Civil District- Raipur, Chhattisgarh. 3 - Commissioner Municipal Corporation- Raipur, District- Raipur, Chhattisgarh. --- Respondent(s) & WPS No. 8988 of 2022 1 - Dinesh Janghel S/o Dhanush Ram Janghel Aged About 53 Years R/o Lodhipara, Jaihind Chowk, Raipur, District Raipur, Chhattisgarh 492004 --- Petitioner(s) versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through Secretary, Department Of Urban Administration And Development, Mahanadi Bhawan, Atal Nagar (Nava Raipur ), Revenue And Civil District Raipur Chhattisgarh 2 - Director Directorate Of Urban Administration And Development, Indravati Bhawan, Atal Nagr (Nava Raipur), Revenue And Civil District Raipur Chhattiagarh 3 - Commissioner Municipal Corporation - Raipur, District - Raipur Chhattisgarh --- Respondent(s) For Petitioner(s) For Respondent/ State For Respondent No.3 : : :
Legal Reasoning
Shri Navoday Singh, advocate on behalf of Shri Utsav Mahiswar, Advocate Shri R.K.Gupta, Addl. Adv. Gen. and Shri Vedant Shadangi, Panel Lawyer Shri Sandeep Dubey and Shri Pankaj Agrawal, Advocates 3 ({Hon’ble Shri Justice Sachin Singh Rajput}) Order on Board 22/09/2025 1. The petitioners have filed these petitions seeking the following relief(s):- “10.1 That, this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to call for the entire record relating to grant of Pension and General Provident Fund to the employees of Municipal Corporation Raipur. 10.2 That, this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to direct the respondent authorities, by way of writ of mandamus to initiate action for inclusion of the petitioner in Pension and General Provident Fund schemes of Municipal Corporation Raipur. 10.3 That, this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to direct the respondent authorities, by way of writ of mandamus to calculate Pension and GPF from the date of initial appointment. 10.4 That, this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to direct the respondent authorities, by way of writ of mandamus to provide the petitioner with GPF account. 10.5 Any other relief, which this Hon'ble Court deems fit according to the facts & circumstances of the case may also be granted.” 2. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioners would submit that the petitioners were initially appointed as Shiksha Karmi Grade–II within the jurisdiction of the Municipal Corporation, Raipur, against vacant and sanctioned posts of teachers. He would further submit that the Department of Urban Administration and Development took a decision to absorb the services of the petitioners and other teachers on a regular vacant post after the fixation of salary vide order dated 06.05.2020. He would also submit that as per the said decision, the absorbed teachers were to be covered under the Contributory Pension Scheme (for short, CPS) and their absorption was given effect from 01.07.2018 vide order dated 05.09.2020. 3. He would contend that the Government of Chhattisgarh, Department of 4 Finance and Planning, had issued guidelines for extending the benefits of the Contributory Pension Scheme to the teachers and as per the letter dated 01.08.2012, each member/employee was to be allotted a Permanent Retirement Account Number (for short, PRAN). It is further submitted that vide notification dated 11.05.2022, the State re-introduced the Old Pension Scheme (for short, OPS), as per the Chhattisgarh Civil Services (Pension) Rules, 1976. The petitioners submitted representations seeking allotment of PRAN and opening of GPF accounts. He also submitted that the Municipal Commissioner, Raipur, admitted the fact that the petitioners are entitled to the Contributory Pension Scheme or any other pension scheme introduced by the Government, but in the absence of a proper response from the State Government, the benefit of the pension scheme has not been extended. He would further contend that till date, PRAN could not be allotted to the petitioners; thus, he prays that a direction may be issued to the respondents to provide PRAN and to include their names for pension scheme and General Provident Fund (for short, GPF) benefits. 4. On the other hand, learned counsel for the respondents would submit that petitioners were appointed around 1998 under the Chhattisgarh Shiksha Karmi (Nagari Nikay) (Bharti Tatha Padonnati) Niyam, 1998, and there was no provision for pension or other retirement benefits in the Rules, 1998. It is argued that though a proposal was sent to the State Government for grant of benefits under the Contributory Pension Scheme, no decision has been taken. It is further submitted that PRAN has now been allotted, and the petitioners are entitled to the benefits under the New Pension Scheme (for short, NPS). It is also submitted that the petitioners’ services were absorbed vide order dated 06.05.2020, and they, with their open eyes, had accepted the terms and conditions mentioned therein, including the applicability of the NPS. 5. With regard to GPF, it is contended that there was no provision for its applicability. Learned counsel further submitted that vide letter dated 10.03.2023, the Government clarified that the Old Pension Scheme would be applicable to Government servants in place of the NPS; however, the said benefit would not be extended to the employees of the urban local bodies, and clarification in this regard has been sought from the State Government. In the absence of any guidelines or instructions from the State Government, it is submitted that the 5 petitioners are not entitled to any relief at this stage. 6. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the documents placed on the record. 7. The relief sought by the petitioners relates, firstly, to allotment of PRAN, and secondly, to applicability of the pension scheme and inclusion of their names in the GPF from the date of their initial appointment. The material on record indicates that the Municipal Corporation, Raipur, from time to time, has sought directions from the State Government in this regard, but the matter has not yet been finalised. 8. The petitioners have been working with the respondents since 1997– 98, and their services were absorbed in the year 2018, but till date, no final decision has been taken with regard to their entitlement under the pension scheme and the GPF. It is informed by the Advocates appearing for the respondents that PRAN has been provided to the petitioners. 9.
Decision
In view of the above, these petitions are disposed of with the liberty to the petitioners to make fresh representations before respondents No.1 and 2 and in turn, respondents No. 1 and 2 are directed to consider and decide the claims of the petitioners regarding the applicability of appropriate pension scheme and inclusion of their names for grant of GPF benefits, strictly in accordance with the law, and to pass a reasoned order preferably within a period of 120 days from the date of receipt of copy of this order. 10. With the aforesaid observation(s) and direction(s), these writ petitions are hereby disposed of. Sd/- ({Sachin Singh Rajput}) JUDGE Deepti DEEPTI HARIKUMAR Digitally signed by DEEPTI HARIKUMAR Date: 2025.09.22 17:41:03 +0530