Disposed

Puna Tiu v. the State of Jharkhand and Anr.

Jharkhand HC2 May 2014Cont.(Cvl)/97/2013

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This High Court disposed of a contempt petition filed for alleged non-compliance of a writ order directing payment of post-retirement benefits. The court found the earlier order complied with and dropped the proceedings, noting any dispute over excess payment must be challenged separately. The case is exceptionally brief.

What did the court decide?

Contempt proceedings were dropped; no recovery was ordered in this order.

Puna Tiu Vs the State of Jharkhand and Anr. — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Jharkhand HC (2014)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI Cont. Case (Civil) No. 97 of 2013

¶2

Puna Tiu … Petitioner

¶3

Vs.

¶4

The State of Jharkhand & Anr. … Opposite Parties ---CORAM : HON’BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE

¶5

---- For the Petitioner : Mr. Ashok Kr. Sinha, Advocate For the Opposite Parties : Ms. Shivani Verma, J.C. to A.G. ----

¶6

Order No. 02 Dated 2^nd May, 2014

¶7

This contempt petition has been filed alleging violation/willful disobedience of the order passed in W.P.(S) No. 5179 of 2012 dated 19.09.2012.

¶8

The said writ petition W.P.(S) No.5179 of 2012 was filed by the petitioner seeking a direction upon the respondents for payment of his post retiral benefits. The said writ petition was disposed of with the following directions and observations :-

¶9

“In view of the above, the present writ petition is disposed of with direction to respondent no.3- Superintendent of Police, West Singhbhum, Chaibasa, to take final decision on the representation of the petitioner, Annexure-3, in any case within 60 days from the date a certified copy of this order is placed before him. Monetary benefits, found due, shall be paid to the petitioner soon thereafter without any further delay.”

¶10

Petitioner is represented by the counsel Mr. Ashok Kr. Sinha and the opposite parties are represented by Miss Shivani Verma, J.C. to A.G.

¶11

In Para-6(iii) of the show cause filed by the opposite party No.2 dated 23.03.2013 it is stated that the petitioner has received L.I.C. and G.P.F. and that the opposite party has taken all endeavours for determination of pay of the petitioner both in basic pay and promotional benefits. In Para-7(k) it is further stated that the petitioner

¶12

was favoured with payment of GIC amounting to Rs.1,68,256/- vide District Order No.2404/2012 dated 31.08.2012. In Para-7(l) it is further stated that the petitioner was favoured with payment of Rs.5,28,393/- on account of GPF vide bill No.29/12-13 dated 15.09.2012. In Para 7(m) it is stated that in consideration of the directions as contained in Finance Department Resolution No.2981 dated 01.09.2008, District Order No.3299/2012 dated 31.12.2012 was passed. It is further stated that huge excess payment has been made to the petitioner amounting to Rs.1,90,765/- and the said amount is recoverable in a lump sum. The payment of the various amounts is also evidenced by various annexures filed along with the show cause.

¶13

Since the order passed in the W.P.(S) No.5179 of 2012 is complied with, the contempt proceeding is dropped. If the petitioner is still aggrieved by any payment made/recovery of the excess payment, he is at liberty to challenge the same in accordance with law.

¶14

(R. Banumathi, C.J.)

¶15

Birendra/Brajesh

Puna Tiu v. the State of Jharkhand and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Puna Tiu v. the State of Jharkhand and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Sunil Kumar Gupta Vs The State Of Jharkhand And Anr.

Ranjeet Sen and Anr. Vs The State Of Jharkhand

Antu Pandey Alias Anant Kumar Pandey Vs The State Of Jharkhand

Smt Xaveria Sebestiana Minz Vs State of Jharkhand and Anr.

Sri Ram Paswan Sri Ram Dusad Vs State of Jharkhand And Ors.

Ram Bachan Thakur Vs State of Jharkhand and Anr.

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Sunil Kumar Gupta Vs The State Of Jharkhand And Anr.

Ranjeet Sen and Anr. Vs The State Of Jharkhand

Antu Pandey Alias Anant Kumar Pandey Vs The State Of Jharkhand

Smt Xaveria Sebestiana Minz Vs State of Jharkhand and Anr.

Sri Ram Paswan  Sri Ram Dusad Vs State of Jharkhand And Ors.

Ram Bachan Thakur Vs State of Jharkhand and Anr.

Sri Ram Paswan Sri Ram Dusad Vs State of Jharkhand And Ors.