Writ petition seeking pension and other retirement benefits. Court disposed of the matter by giving liberty to petitioner to approach concerned authority via representation if payment remains pending.
Liberty given to petitioner to approach concerned authority by filing representation within four months.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
W.P.(S) No.5923 of 2008
Ram Vyas Prasad … … Petitioner
Versus
… … Respondents
CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE DEEPAK ROSHAN
For the Petitioner :Mr. Arvind Kumar, Adv. For the Res.State : Mr. Rahul Saboo, S.C.I
06/03.02.2021
Heard learned counsel for the parties through
V.C.
2
2. The instant writ application has been preferred by the petitioner for following reliefs:-
(a) To pay the full and final pension from August, 2007 onwards after adjusting the amount of provisional pension paid.
(b) To pay the amount of commuted value of
pension.
(c) To pay the amount of full and final Gratuity after adjusting the amount of provisional gratuity paid.
(d) To pay the entire amount of the General Provident Fund along with the applicable statutory interest thereon till the date of payment.
(e) To send the statement in respect of deductions made from the salary of the petitioner on account of the General Provident Fund for the period from 1991-92 to 2007-08 to the District Provident Fund Officer, Rohtas, Sasaram (Bihar).
(f) To send the service book of the petitioner to the Office of the Junior Plant Protection Officer, Ranchi.
(g) To pay arrears of salary of the petitioner with effect from 09.08.1999 to 31.07.2007 on account of the 2nd Financial Upgradation allowed to him under the ACP Scheme.
3. Mr. Arvind Kumar, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that in spite of his best efforts; he could not seek latest instruction from his client about the present position. However, from counter affidavit it appears that
3
amount as claimed in the instant writ application has been paid to the petitioner as such the instant writ application may be disposed of by giving liberty to the petitioner to represent before the concerned authority, if at all any amount still remains to be paid.
4. Mr. Rahul Saboo, learned counsel for the respondent-State does not have any objection.
5. In view of the limited submission advanced by the learned counsel for the petitioner, the instant writ application, is hereby, disposed of by giving liberty to the petitioner to approach the concerned authority, if at all any amount has not been paid, by filing a representation and the same shall be disposed of by the concerned authority after verifying the records of the case within a period of four months from the date of receipt of such representation.
6. With the aforesaid terms the instant writ application stands disposed of.
(Deepak Roshan, J.)
Fahim /-
Ram Vyas Prasad
The State of Jharkhand
State of Bihar
DEEPAK ROSHAN
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
