Disposed

Rajendra Prasad Sahu v. South Eastern Coalfields Ltd.and Ors.

Chhattisgarh HC7 Oct 2010WPS/5784/2010

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

A retired Mining Sardar petitions for the payment of salary and gratuity withheld by South Eastern Coalfields Limited. The Court permits withdrawal of the petition with liberty to file a fresh representation within three months.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner permitted to withdraw petition; respondent No.2 directed to decide pending representation within three months.

Rajendra Prasad Sahu Vs South Eastern… — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Chhattisgarh HC (2010)

¶1

¶2

LNIHE HONTBLE^{HEGHCQEIRTOECHHATFISGARHAT} aimswg gag) WRIT BETHIQN (5mg^$"%(1Q5291a

¶3

PETITIQNER

¶4

/ Rajendra Prasa£^{Sahu$GnafLate} Shri Buddhuram Sahu’, aged abaut 61 years, Retired Mining Sardar, Resident snf Vinage Ka§yanyun Post Devnagaf, Tahsil Surajpurg^{DEstrictSurguja} {C‘G‘y

VERSUS

RESPQNDENIS : /1.

South Eastern^{CaakfielcisLimited,} Seepa£ Road, E§iasm§n District BHaspur ,,.(C‘G.), through Et$ Chairman cum^{ManagingD§rectcL}

¶9

The €hief Geaeral Manager, South Eastern C9a!fields Limited, Baikunthpur, gistrict Karéya ($5.).

¶10

The Deputy Regicxnai Manager‘ Sauth Eastern Coaifields Limited, Jhiimiti Area, Baikunthgur Sub Area, District^Koriya {CGS};

¶11

,4;

¶12

The Deputy PerSQnnel Manager, South Eastern Coalf§e4ds Limited, Jhilmili, Pandavpara Celliery, Baikuathpur^Area, District Kariya " (get

¶13

WRIT PETITION UNDER^{ARTICLE226OFTHECQNSTITUTIQN} gr,^mam

@ new

WWwPcnwe’nxgiw200

more (Wu)

WWW mmm	mmm	mmfiwm §wimawé¥t
	SB‘ : HON’BLE MR. JUS’HCE PR} 07.10.2010	TINKER DIWAKER
	Grievance of the petitio though he is entitled for gratuity i.e‘ from 16.11.09 to 30.11.09 b Shri V.K.Pandey, counsel f Shri Praveen Das, who nor present ^{in the Court is dir}	”r in the present petition is that and salary for the period of 11 days the same has not been paid to him or the petitioner. nally appears for the respondents, ^{ected to appear on their behalf.}
	and his last reprssentation Counsel for ths petitioner respondent No.2 has not been de be served if the petitioner is penn direction be issued to respon‘ representation of the petitioner. Counsel appearing for re representation of the petitioner is Acoordingly, the petition petition ^{With the aforesaid libert}} decide the pending representatio three months from the date of rec r	ated 19.8.2010 filed before the cided. submits that ends of justice would itted to withdraw this petition and n of the petitioner Within a period of eipt ofcopy of this order. ient No.2 to decide the pending .spondentswhas no objection if the decided in accordance with law. er is permitted to Withdraw this . The respondent No.2 is directed to
	It would be the duty of ti’ concerned about the passing of th It is made clear that this C on merits of the case and the aut to decide the same strictly in acco	is order. ourt has not expressed any opinion hority concerned would be at liberty rdance with law. Sd/— e petitioner to apprise the authority Pritinker Diwaker Judge

Rajendra Prasad Sahu v. South Eastern Coalfields Ltd.and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Rajendra Prasad Sahu v. South Eastern Coalfields Ltd.and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Madhuri Roy Vs South Eastern Coalfields Ltd. and Anr.

N.N.B.Kujur Vs the Board of Directors,Bilaspur Raipur

Vishal Nath Tiwari Vs State of Chhattisgarh and Ors.

Divisional Manager C.G. Inf.Dev.Cor. Vs Ramswaroop Gupta and Anr.

Vijay Kumar Das Vs State of Chhattisgarh and Ors.

Latel Prasad Yadaw Vs State of Chhattisgarh and Ors.