Disposed

Manohar Pandey v. Chairman cum Managing Director

Patna HC22 Mar 2021CWJC/9750/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In an oral order, the High Court at Patna disposed of a writ petition regarding delayed pension payment upon recording a communication indicating the balance amount had been paid via RTGS, with liberty granted if the payment did not materialize.

What did the court decide?

Writ petition disposed; liberty granted to file contempt petition if claimed payment was not actually received.

Manohar Pandey Vs Chairman cum Managing Director — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Patna HC (2021)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

¶2

Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.9750 of 2019

¶3

======================================================

¶4

Manohar Pandey Son of Late Gopal Jee Pandey Resident of Village-Khutta, P.O. Bandkhutta via Bagodar, District-Giridih

¶5

... ... Petitioner/s

¶6

Versus

¶7

Chairman cum Managing Director, Bihar State Power Holding Company Limited, Patna.

¶8

Deputy General Manager (Finance and Accounts), Bihar State Power Holding Company Limited, Patna.

¶9

Director, Terminal Benefit, Bihar State Electricity Board, Patna Now Bihar State Power Holding Company Limited, Patna.

¶10

Chairman cum Managing Director, Jharkhand Urja Vikas Nigam Ltd. Jharkhand

¶11

General Manager cum Chief Engineer, Patratu Thermal Power Station, Hazaribagh.

¶12

Account Officer, Bihar State Electricity Board, Patna, Bihar State Power Holding Company Limited, Patna.

¶13

... ... Respondent/s

¶14

======================================================

¶15

Appearance :

¶16

For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Harendra Kumar Tiwary For the Respondent/s : Mr.Vinay Kirti Singh For the Jharkhand Urja Utpadan Nigam: Mr. Satya Brata Verma

¶17

======================================================

¶18

CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR UPADHYAY ORAL ORDER

¶19

9 22-03-2021

¶20

Mr. Harendera Kumar Tiwary has placed on record

¶21

the communication received from the Dy. General Manager Jharkhand Urja Utpadan Nigam Limited, Ranchi, Jharkhand dated 18.3.2021 which indicates that the petitioner has been paid the balance amount through RTGS.

¶22

The communication dated 18.3.2021 is taken on record. The copy of the communication is quoted below:-

¶23

isz"kd%

¶24

fou; vfxjk]

¶25

Patna High Court CWJC No.9750 of 2019(9) dt.22-03-2021

2/3

mi egkizca/kd

lsok esa]

ojh; izca/kd (fof/k),

¶30

kj[k.M ÅtkZ mRiknu fuxe fyfeVsM]

¶31

usiky gkml ds fudV] Mksj.Mk] jkWaph A

¶32

fo’k; % C.W.J.C. No. 9750/2019 euksgj ik.Ms; cuke v/;{k&lg&izca/k funs”kd cuke fcgkj LvsV ikoj (gksfYMax) dEiuh fyfeVsM] iVuk ,oa vU; ds laca/k esa] ekuuh; mPp U;k;ky;] iVuk }kjk fnukad 08-03-2021 dks ikfjr vkns”k ds vuqikyu esa A

¶33

izlax %& Jh lR;ozr oekZ] Lfkk;h vf/koDrk] >k0Å0fo0fu0fy0] ekuuh; mPp U;k;ky;] iVuk dk i=kad “kwU; fnukad 08-03-2021

¶34

egk”k;]

¶35

funs”kkuqlkj] mi;qZDr fo’k;d izlaxk/khu i= (izfrlayXu) ds lanHkZ esa dguk gS fd Jh euksgj ik.Ms;] lsokfuor (31.01.1999), fo|qr v/kh{k.k vfHk;ark (pkyw izHkkj) irjkrw ok’i “kfDr izfr’Bku] irjkrw dks ekuuh; mPp U;k;ky;] iVuk }kjk fnukad 08-03-2021 dks ikfjr vkns”k ds vuqikyu esa osru iqujh{k.k dh jkf”k #0 80]305@& ,oa iqujhf{kr vO;ogr vodk”k uxnhdj.k dh jkf”k #0 59]579@& dqy jkf”k #0 1]39]884@&(,d yk[k mUupkfyl gtkj vkB lkS pkSjklh) ek= dk Hkqxrku psd la0 442975 fnukad 17-03-2021 } kjk fd;k tk pqdk gSA bl lanHkZ esa ys[kk inkf/kdkjh (“ks’k ifjlEifŸk)] irjkrw ok’i “kfDr izfr’Bku] irjkrw dk i=kad 32 fnukad 17-03-2021 dks vkids vko”;d dkjZokbZ gsrq layXu gS A

¶36

di;k C.W.J.C. No. 9750/2019 esa ikfjr vkns”k ls Hkh v|ksgLrk{kjh dks voxr djkus dh dik djasxs A

¶37

vuq0& rFkSo A

¶38

mi egkizca/kd (ek0la0)

¶39

Patna High Court CWJC No.9750 of 2019(9) dt.22-03-2021 3/3

¶40

Considering the communication dated 18.3.2021, the writ petition is disposed of. In the event, the amount indicated in the communication dated 18.3.2021 has not been paid to the petitioner, liberty shall be available to the petitioner to proceed against the Officer of Power Holding Company Limited, Ranchi, Jharkhand for false communication by filing contempt petition.

¶41

With the aforesaid, the writ application stands disposed of.

¶42

(Anil Kumar Upadhyay, J)

¶43

Ravi/-

¶44

Manohar Pandey v. Chairman cum Managing Director

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Manohar Pandey v. 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

Rajendra Kumar Mishra Vs The State of Bihar

Kamal Sah Vs The State of Bihar

Md. Danish @ Md. Danish Iqbal Vs the State of Bihar

Anil Thakur Vs The State of Bihar

Punam Pandey Vs The Chief Election Commissioner in Election of India

Hardeep Yadav @ Hardeep Singh Vs the State of Bihar