Disposed¶26

Bimal Kumar Bishnoi v. The State Of Bihar and Ors.

Patna HC2 Feb 2024CWJC/13081/2017

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Retiral benefits; statutory interest on retiral dues; gratuity with interest; leave encashment; deputation to BREDA; Bihar State Sugar Corporation; takeover under the Bihar Sugar Undertaking Acquisition Act, 1985; Central Sugar Wage Board; Factories Act, 1948; counter affidavit uncontroverted; writ petition disposed of with liberty to approach competent authority for disputed amount; Patna High Court CWJC No.13081 of 2017; Harish Kumar, J; decided 02-02-2024.

What did the court decide?

Writ petition disposed of; petitioner left at liberty to approach the competent authority for payment of any disputed amount, if unsatisfied with the amounts already paid. ¶26

Bimal Kumar Bishnoi Vs The State Of Bihar and Ors. — Patna HC (2024) — LawSathi Research

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.13081 of 2017

¶2

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

¶3

Bimal Kumar Bishnoi S/o-Late Sundar Lal Bishnoi, Resident of Flat No. 401, Abhishek Plaza, Exhibition Road, P.s.-Gandhi Maidan, Distt.-Patna.

¶4

... ... Petitioner/s

¶5

Versus

¶6

The State of Bihar through the Chief Secretary, Govt. of Bihar, Patna.

¶7

The Secretary, Department of Energy, Govt. of Bihar, Patna.

¶8

The Bihar Renewable Energy Development Agency, through its Director, Sone Bhawan, Birchand Patel Path, Patna.

¶9

The Director, Bihar Renewable Energy Development Agency, Sone Bhawan, Birchand Patel Path, Patna.

¶10

The State of Bihar Sugar Corporation Ltd, Patna, through its Managing Director.

¶11

The Managing Director, Bihar State Sugar Corporation, Ltd. Udyog Bhawan, Purvi Gandhi Maidan, Patna.

¶12

... ... Respondent/s

¶13

====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Suresh Mishra, Adv. For the Resp-State : Mr. Rajiv Kumar Sinha For the Resp Nos.5&6 : Mr. Gyan Shankar, Adv. For the BREDA : Mr. Prasoon Sinha, Adv. Mr. Amarnath Kumar, Adv. ======================================================

¶14

CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE HARISH KUMAR ORAL ORDER

¶15

14 02-02-2024

¶16

Heard Mr. Suresh Mishra, learned counsel for the petitioner; Mr. Gyan Shankar, learned counsel for the Bihar State Sugar Corporation; Mr. Rajiv Kumar Sinha, learned counsel for the State and the learned counsel for the BREDA.

¶17

The petitioner by filing the present writ petition seeks a direction upon the respondents to ensure payment of all his due retiral benefits along with the statutory interest thereon.

¶18

A counter affidavit has been filed on behalf of the

¶19

Patna High Court CWJC No.13081 of 2017(14) dt.02-02-2024 2/3

¶20

respondents no. 5 and 6.

¶21

It is submitted that the petitioner was an employee of S.K.G. Sugar Limited, which was taken over by the State of Bihar by the Bihar Sugar Undertaking Acquisition Act, 1985 and transferred to the Bihar State Sugar Corporation Ltd. The salary and other allowances of the employees of the Sugar Factories are governed by the recommendations of the Central Sugar Wage Board and Factories Act, 1948 and other labour laws also.

¶22

So far as the period for which the petitioner rendered his services in the Bihar State Sugar Corporation from 27.10.1985 to 05.06.1998 is concerned, the petitioner has already been paid all his pre and post retiral dues. He further submitted that thereafter the petitioner was sent on deputation to BREDA, where he joined on 06.06.1998 and continued there till his retirement. For the period rendered under the BREDA, the petitioner has also been paid the admissible amount under the leave encashment and gratuity, apart from the interest over the gratuity amount, which have duly been mentioned in paragraphs-8 to 12 of the counter affidavit filed on behalf of the respondents no. 5 and 6

¶23

At this stage, learned counsel for the petitioner,

¶24

Patna High Court CWJC No.13081 of 2017(14) dt.02-02-2024 3/3

¶25

submitted that though a counter affidavit has been filed but the same is required to be verified at the ends of the petitioner but because of his best efforts, he could not contact with his client and, as such, he is unable to dispute at present.

¶26

Considering the submissions advanced and the averments made in the counter affidavit filed on behalf of the respondents no. 5 and 6, the present writ petition stands disposed of.

¶27

Needless to observe that if the petitioner is not satisfied with the amount, which has been paid to him, he shall always be at liberty to approach before the competent authority for payment of his disputed amount, if any.

¶28

(Harish Kumar, J)

¶29

rohit/-

¶30

Bimal Kumar Bishnoi v. The State Of Bihar and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Bimal Kumar Bishnoi v. The State Of Bihar and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Smt. Mahapunya Kumari Vs The State of Bihar

Haidar Ali Vs The State of Bihar

Anjali Banerjee Vs The State of Bihar

Meena Devi Vs The State of Bihar

Pawan Kumar @ Pawan Kumar Singh Vs The State of Bihar

Uttam Sah Vs The State of Bihar