Disposed

Rajesh Hadi v. Jharkhand Mineral Area Development Authority Represented through Its Managing Director

Jharkhand HC10 Mar 2021WPC/451/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a writ petition concerning unpaid death-cum-unretiral dues, the High Court directed the petitioner to file a fresh representation with supporting credentials. The respondents were instructed to decide within eight weeks and pay any admitted benefits within six weeks thereafter.

What did the court decide?

P direction to file fresh representation; mandate for respondent to decide within eight weeks and pay dues within six weeks if favorable.

Rajesh Hadi Vs Jharkhand Mineral Area… — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Jharkhand HC (2021)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI

¶2

W.P. (S) No. 451 of 2021

¶3

Rajesh Hadi, aged about 42 years, S/o Late Gopi Hadi, R/o Patherdih Ajmera, P.O. Mohan Bazar, P.S. Sudamdih, Dist. Dhanbad (Jharkhand)

¶4

… Petitioner

¶5

-Versus-

¶6

Jharkhand Mineral Area Development Authority represented through its Managing Director, at Luby Circular Road, P.O., P.S. & DistrictDhanbad (Jharkhand)

¶7

The Managing Director, Jharkhand Mineral Area Development Authority, at Luby Circular Road, P.O., P.S. & District- Dhanbad (Jharkhand) … Respondents

¶8

CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR DWIVEDI

¶9

For the Petitioner	: Mr. Niranjan Singh, Advocate
For the Respondent-JMADA	: Dr. Ashok Kumar Singh, Advocate -----

¶10

04/10.03.2021. Heard Mr. Niranjan Singh, learned counsel for the petitioner and

¶11

Dr. Ashok Kumar Singh, learned counsel for the respondent-JMADA.

¶12

This writ petition has been heard through Video Conferencing in view of the guidelines of the High Court taking into account the situation arising due to COVID-19 pandemic. None of the parties have complained about any technical snag of audio-video and with their consent this matter has been heard on merit.

¶13

The petitioner has preferred this writ petition for direction upon the respondents for payment of rest unpaid death-cum-unpaid retiral dues and other legal dues such as benefits of A.C.P. and its consequential benefits, benefit of 6^th Central Pay Revision effective from 01.01.1996 and benefit of 6^th Pay Revision which is effective from 01.01.2006.

¶14

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that mother of the petitioner, namely, Lila Hadin was working as Sweeper at Water Supply SubDivision, Jharia-2 under the respondents. The mother of the petitioner died on 26.02.2013. The amount of Rs.6,50,000/- was paid to the mother of the

¶15

-2-

¶16

petitioner towards her retiral dues by the reasoned order dated 03.08.2012. He further submits that the respondents have not paid rest amount towards death-cum-retiral dues. He also submits that the petitioner has already filed several representations, contained in Annexures-3 and 3/1, but no decision has been taken as yet.

¶17

Learned counsel for respondent-JMADA submits that the petitioner may be directed to file a fresh representation before respondent no.2 for needful, who will consider the case of the petitioner in accordance with rules, regulations, guidelines and the Schemes framed in this regard by JMADA.

¶18

In view of the above facts and considering the submissions of the learned counsel for the parties, the petitioner is directed to file a fresh representation before respondent no.2 with all the credentials, on which, he is relying for such relief, within a period of three weeks from today. If such representation is filed within the aforesaid period, respondent no.2 will take a decision in accordance with rules, regulations, guidelines and the Schemes framed in this regard by the respondent-JMADA for releasing the admitted dues within a period of eight weeks thereafter.

¶19

It goes without saying that if the decision is taken in favour of the petitioner, the benefit of the same shall be accrued in favour of the petitioner within a period of six weeks thereafter.

¶20

With the above observations and directions, this writ petition stands disposed of.

¶21

(Sanjay Kumar Dwivedi, J.)

¶22

Ajay/

Rajesh Hadi v. Jharkhand Mineral Area Development Authority Represented through Its Managing Director

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Rajesh Hadi v. Jharkhand Mineral Area Development Authority Represented through Its Managing Director

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

Vikash Chandra Pandey Vs State of Jharkhand

Dinesh Kumar Yadav Vs Union Of India Through Director General Central Reserve Police Force And Ors.

Biswajit Gorai Vs Health

Rajendra Kumar Vs State of Jharkhand through Secretary Education and Human Resources

Bhima Vs the Central Coalfields Limited through Its Chairman Cum Managing Director

Anil Kumar Singh Vs the State of Jharkhand