Disposed

Prakash Dusadh v. Ms Bharat Coking Coal Limited through Chairman Cum Managing Director

Jharkhand HC6 Jan 2023WPC/2164/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In W.P.(S) No. 2164 of 2022, the Court directed Respondents to treat the petition as a representation and determine the petitioner's entitlement to CMPF dues for her deceased mother within ten weeks.

What did the court decide?

Petition treated as a representation; directing Respondents to determine entitlement and disburse funds or provide reasons within ten weeks.

Prakash Dusadh Vs Ms Bharat Coking Coal… — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Jharkhand HC (2023)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI W.P.(S) No. 2164 of 2022

¶2

----

¶3

Prakash Dusadh S/o Late Lakhan Dusadh, R/o Yasodha Niketan, Vishwakarma Colony, Nutandih, PO Jagjiwan Nagar, PS Saraidhela, Dist. Dhanbad.

¶4

… Petitioner

¶5

-versus-

¶6

M/s. Bharat Coking Coal Limited through Chairman-cum-Managing Director, Koyla Bhawan, Koyla Nagar, Dhanbad.

¶7

The General Manager, Lodna Area, M/s. Bharat Coking Coal Limited, Lodna, Dhanbad.

¶8

The Project Officer, Barari Colliery, M/s. Bharat Coking Coal Limited, Bhulan Barari, PS Patherdih, Dist. Dhanbad.

¶9

The Regional Commissioner, Coal Mines Provident Fund, Region-II, Jagjiwan Nagar, PS Saraidhela, Dist. Dhanbad.

¶10

… Respondents

¶11

----

¶12

CORAM : HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ANANDA SEN

¶13

----

¶14

4/ 06.01.2023 No one appears on behalf of the petitioner or the respondents.

¶15

2. I have gone through the entire writ petition. Considering the prayer made in the writ petition and the nature of order, which I intend to pass, it is not necessary to call for any Counter Affidavit in opposition. Further, this writ petition can be disposed of at this stage itself.

¶16

3. In this writ petition, petitioner has prayed for payment of Coal Mines Provident Fund amount of deceased mother of the petitioner, namely, Kunti Dusadhin, who was employee of Bharat Coking Coal Limited, who died in harness on 04.03.1991. It is the case of the petitioner that the authorities of Coal Mines Provident Fund have not paid the CMPF amount till date. Petitioner claims that she, by herself, and through the Union also, filed several representations for payment of CMPF amount, but, no action has been taken. 4. From Annexure 9 of the writ petition, I find that Bharat Coking Coal Limited has informed the petitioner that they are in the process of making payment, but since the matter is very old one, it is very difficult to search out the relevant papers and documents, which is consuming time.

¶17

5. Considering the fact that the petitioner is claiming CMPF amount of her mother, who died in harness, the issue needs to be first considered and looked into by the Bharat Coking Coal Limited and the authorities of Coal Mines Provident Fund. Thus, I direct the Bharat Coking Coal Limited and Coal Mines Provident Fund authorities to treat this writ petition as representation and consider the claim of the petitioner and come to a conclusion whether the petitioner is entitled to receive any amount or not. If it is found that the

¶18

-: 2 :-

¶19

petitioner is entitled to the amount of Coal Mines Provident Fund, same should be disbursed to the petitioner, preferably within a period of 10 (ten) weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. If any portion of claim of the petitioner is denied, reasons thereof should also be communicated to the petitioner within the aforesaid period.

¶20

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

¶21

(Ananda Sen, J.)

¶22

Kumar/S.K./Cp-02

Prakash Dusadh v. Ms Bharat Coking Coal Limited through Chairman Cum Managing Director

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Prakash Dusadh v. Ms Bharat Coking Coal Limited through Chairman Cum 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

Kaushalaya Devi Vs the Central Coalfields Limited through Its Chairman Cum Managing Director

Julius Tigga Vs State of Jharkhand through Secretary School Education and Literacy Deptt

Ishwar Dutt Kujur Vs Education

Maksud Hussain Vs the State of Jharkhand through Deputy Commissioner

Elbina Kongari Vs the State of Jharkhand

Ram Chandra Choudhary Vs the State of Jharkhand