PANKAJ JAISWAL vs STATE OF CHHATTISGARH Advocate - A.G. — WPS/5881/2023

Disposed: Uncontested--DISPOSED OFF on 06th May 2026.

Case disposed

CNR: CGHC010267062023

Filing Number

WPS/15172/2023

Filing Date

11-Aug-2023

Registration No

WPS/5881/2023

Registration Date

24-Aug-2023

Judge

Hon'ble Shri Justice Naresh Kumar Chandravanshi

Coram

Hon'ble Shri Justice Naresh Kumar Chandravanshi

Bench Type

Single Bench

Category

SERVICE MATTERS ( 6 )

Sub-Category

RETIRAL BENEFITS. ( 601 )

Judicial Branch

Writ Section

Decision Date

06-May-2026

Nature of Disposal

Uncontested--DISPOSED OFF

Last updated 06-Jun-2026

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.PANKAJ JAISWAL

    Adv. Shri Aishwarya Kumar Dubey

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.STATE OF CHHATTISGARH Advocate - A.G.

  2. 2.Joint Director

  3. 3.The Nagar Palika Ramanujganj,

    Adv. RAHUL MISHRA,SHARDA PRASAD RAHUL MISHRA SUYASH DHAR SABYASACHI CHOUBEY

Case History

  1. Case disposedDisposed

  2. 06-May-2026

    Hon'ble Shri Justice Naresh Kumar ChandravanshiView PDF

    Case Summary: WPS/5881/2023 - Pankaj Jaiswal v. State of Chhattisgarh The Chhattisgarh High Court partially allowed the writ petition, directing respondents to pay 18% simple interest per annum on delayed retirement benefits (pension, gratuity, leave encashment) from the date of retirement (30.06.2008) until actual payment, considering an unjustified delay of 16 years and 8 months. However, the court rejected the petitioner's claim for arrears of wages from July 2001 to June 2008 under the "no work no pay" principle, as the employee remained absent without joining duties post-reinstatement order. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

  3. 01-Apr-2026

    Old Cases

    Hon'ble Shri Justice Amitendra Kishore Prasad

  4. 17-Mar-2026

    Hon'ble Shri Justice Amitendra Kishore PrasadView PDF

  5. 31-Jan-2026

    Hon'ble Shri Justice Amitendra Kishore PrasadView PDF

  6. 29-Jan-2026

    Motion Hearing Matters

    Hon'ble Shri Justice Amitendra Kishore Prasad

  7. 19-Jan-2026

    Motion Hearing Matters

    Hon'ble Shri Justice Amitendra Kishore Prasad

  8. 15-Jan-2026

    Hon'ble Shri Justice Amitendra Kishore PrasadView PDF

  9. 04-Dec-2025

    Hon'ble Shri Justice Amitendra Kishore PrasadView PDF

  10. 02-Dec-2025

    Motion Hearing Matters

    Hon'ble Shri Justice Amitendra Kishore Prasad

  11. 18-Nov-2025

    Hon'ble Shri Justice Amitendra Kishore PrasadView PDF

  12. 26-Sep-2025

    Motion Hearing Matters

    Hon'ble Shri Justice Amitendra Kishore Prasad

  13. 12-Sep-2025

    Hon'ble Shri Justice Amitendra Kishore PrasadView PDF

  14. 30-Apr-2025

    Hon'ble Shri Justice Bibhu Datta GuruView PDF

  15. 03-Apr-2025

    Hon'ble Shri Justice Bibhu Datta GuruView PDF

  16. 03-Apr-2025

    Orders on IAs

    Hon'ble Shri Justice Bibhu Datta Guru

  17. 26-Mar-2025

    Hon'ble Shri Justice Bibhu Datta GuruView PDF

  18. 24-Feb-2025

    Hon'ble Shri Justice Bibhu Datta GuruView PDF

  19. 12-Feb-2025

    Hon'ble Shri Justice Amitendra Kishore PrasadView PDF

  20. 02-Jul-2024

    Hon'ble Shri Justice Sachin Singh RajputView PDF

  21. 20-Feb-2024

    Hon'ble Shri Justice Arvind Singh ChandelView PDF

  22. 02-Nov-2023

    Hon'ble Shri Justice Arvind Singh ChandelView PDF

  23. 19-Oct-2023

    Fresh Matters

    Hon'ble Shri Justice Narendra Kumar Vyas

  24. 25-Aug-2023

    Hon'ble Shri Justice Narendra Kumar VyasView PDF

  25. 25-Aug-2023

    First hearing

    Initial hearing scheduled

  26. 11-Aug-2023

    Case filed

    Registration No. WPS/5881/2023

casestatus.in Summary

Case Summary: WPS/5881/2023 - Pankaj Jaiswal v. State of Chhattisgarh The Chhattisgarh High Court partially allowed the writ petition, directing respondents to pay 18% simple interest per annum on delayed retirement benefits (pension, gratuity, leave encashment) from the date of retirement (30.06.2008) until actual payment, considering an unjustified delay of 16 years and 8 months. However, the court rejected the petitioner's claim for arrears of wages from July 2001 to June 2008 under the "no work no pay" principle, as the employee remained absent without joining duties post-reinstatement order. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

District Courts Supreme Court
Search Another Case