Prabhunath Singh vs Mineral Area Development ...
2021 Latest Caselaw 1871 Jhar

          IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
                        W.P. (S) No. 3396 of 2020
                              -----------

          Prabhunath Singh.                                      ...    ...      ...     ...Petitioner
                                 -Versus-

1. Mineral Area Development Authority (Statutory Authority Incorporated Under the Jharkhand Mineral Area Development Authority Act, 2000) Through its Chairman, Lubi Circular Road, Hirapur, P.O. + P.S. + District-Dhanbad.

2. Managing Director, Mineral Area Development Authority, Lubi Circular Road, Hirapur, P.O. + P.S. + Dist. Dhanbad.

3. Secretary, Mineral Area Development Authority, Lubi Circular Road, Hirapur, P.O.+P.S.+ Dist. Dhanbad. ... ... ... ...Respondents

-----------

CORAM: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE DR. S.N.PATHAK (Through: Video Conferencing) For the Petitioner : Mr. Tarun Kumar No.1, Advocate. For the Respondents : Mr. Mahavir Prasad Sinha, Advocate.

-----------

04/ 09.06.2021 Heard the parties.

This is second round of limitation by the petitioner who has retired from

the services of the MADA in the year 2014 for payment of post retiral benefits.

Previous Writ Petition being W.P.(S) No.5024 of 2014 was disposed of

by judgment dated 10.11.2014 directing the Managing Director, MADA to consider

fresh representation preferred by the petitioner and pass a reasoned and speaking order

after verification of the service record of the petitioner within a period of 12 weeks.

In compliance thereof, the MADA passed a reasoned order wherein a

sum of Rs. 14,71,122/- has been found to be admissible against various post retirement

and service dues. Payments were to be made in instalment of Rs. 50,000/- per month as

per the scheme framed for the retired employee of MADA keeping into account the

weak financial condition of the organization.

The petitioner, however, has again approached this Court by filing this

instant writ petition with a plea that arrears of difference amount of provident fund and

arrears of difference of group insurance along with other retiral benefits has not been

paid to the petitioner and seek indulgence of this Court for direction to the respondents

to pay aforesaid dues to the petitioner.

On the other hand, learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the MADA

has no objection, if a direction is given to the Managing Director, MADA to dispose of

the representation of the petitioner and to pay the admitted dues to the petitioner on

account of his post retiral benefits as per the scheme.

Be that as it may, having gone through the submissions of the parties and

without going into the merits of the case, I hereby direct the petitioner to file a detailed

representation claiming his all the dues which has remained unpaid under different

heads before respondents, Managing Director, MADA along with a copy of this order

within a period of six weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. On receipt

of such representation, the Managing Director, MADA shall consider the claim of the

petitioner and pass a reasoned order in accordance with law within a further period of

six weeks. If any amount is found payable, the said amount would be paid to the

petitioner, within a period of two weeks thereafter.

If any portion of the claim of the petitioner is denied or disputed by the

respondents, the reasons for such denial, should be communicated to the petitioner

within the said period.

With the aforesaid observation and direction, the writ petition stands

disposed of.

[Dr. S.N.Pathak,J]

P.K.S.