Disposed

Madan Hari v. Jharkhand Mineral Area Development Authority Represented through Its Managing Director

Jharkhand HC12 Jan 2023WPC/80/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This is a writ petition filed by a retired employee seeking post-retiral benefits from Jharkhand Mineral Area Development Authority. The High Court, without calling an affidavit, directed the authority to consider the claim under its scheme and pay admitted dues. The exercise must conclude within 12 weeks.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner directed to file detailed representation within six weeks; authority to consider claim and pay dues within 12 weeks or communicate reasons for denial.

Madan Hari Vs Jharkhand Mineral Area… — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Jharkhand HC (2023)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI

¶2

WP(S) No. 80 of 2023

Madan Hari

…... Petitioner(s)

Vs.

1. Jharkhand Mineral Area Development Authority, through its -Managing Director, Dhanbad.

¶7

2. The Managing Director, Jh. Mineral Area Development Authority, Dhanbad

¶8

.…... Respondent(s)

¶9

¶10

CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANANDA SEN .

¶11

For the Petitioner(s) : Mr. Niranjan Singh, Advocate. For the respondents : Mr. Santosh Kumar, Advocate.

¶12

¶13

02/12.01.2023: The petitioner, who was an employee of Jharkhand Mineral Area Development Authority (hereinafter to be referred as 'MADA'), has superannuated on 30.6.2022. The petitioner has approached this Court claiming his post retiral benefits, as mentioned in prayer portion of the writ petition, which the petitioner is entitled to receive from MADA.

¶14

Counsel for the petitioner submits that suffice it would be if a direction is given to the Managing Director, MADA to decide the claim of the petitioner and to pass an appropriate order on the representation of the petitioner and further respondent No. 2- the Managing Director, MADA be directed to pay the admitted dues of the petitioner as per the scheme.

¶15

Counsel appearing on behalf of MADA has no objection, if a direction is given to the Managing Director, MADA to dispose of the representation of the petitioner and to pay the admitted dues to the petitioner on account of his post retiral benefits as per the scheme.

¶16

Considering the nature of prayer of the petitioner and in view of the order which I intend to pass, it is not necessary to call for an affidavit in opposition i.e. from MADA.

¶17

Accordingly, I direct the petitioner to file a detailed representation claiming his post retiral benefits under different heads before respondent No. 2- the Managing Director- MADA along with a copy of this order within six weeks from today. On receipt of such representation, the Managing Director, MADA shall consider the claim of the petitioner in terms of the scheme formulated by the MADA for payment of post retiral benefits to the employees and will pass a reasoned order. If any amount is found payable, the said amount would be paid to the petitioner thereafter as per the scheme. The entire exercise should be concluded within 12 weeks from the date of receipt of representation along with a copy of this order.

¶18

If any portion of the claim of the petitioner is denied or disputed by the respondent(s), the reasons for such denial, should be communicated to the petitioner within the said period.

¶19

With the aforesaid observation and direction, this writ petition stands disposed of .

¶20

(ANANDA SEN, J.)

¶21

Anu/-CP-2.

Madan Hari v. Jharkhand Mineral Area Development Authority Represented through Its Managing Director

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Madan Hari 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

Smt Marry Anna Shanta Minz Vs the State of Jharkhand

Suresh Prasad Singh Vs the State of Jharkhand

Parwati Purty Vs State of Jharkhand through Its Chief Secretary

Nidhi Thakkar Vs Ms Bharat Coking Coal Limited

Deepak Kumar Mishra Vs Central Coalfields Ltd. And Ors.

Most Binita Devi Alias Vinita Devi Vs Central Coalfield Limited through Its Chairman Cum Managing Director