IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
W.P. (S) No. 4149 of 2010
Md. Jamrudin Ansari ... ... ... ... ... Petitioner
Versus
1.
Mineral Area Development Authority, through its
ChairmancumManaging Director, Dhanbad
2. The Secretary, Mineral Ara Development Authority,
Dhanbad
… … … Respondents
CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE D. N. PATEL
For the Petitioner: Mr. Pankaj Kumr
For the Respondents: Mr. Bhawesh Kumar
th
04/Dated: 12 October, 2011
1) Counsel for the petitioner submitted that petitioner has retired as
as Khalasi on 31.3.2010 and he was employed with the
respondents.
2) Counsel for the respondents submitted that now the detailed
counter affidavit has been filed and as per para.4 of the counter
affidavit, legally payable amount to the petitioner comes to
Rs.6,96,230/, but this amount is not being paid to the petitioner
because the respondents have no sufficient fund in hand.
3) In view of this submission, counsel for the petitioner submitted that
the amount stated in para.4 of the counter affidavit is not a correct
calculation of the retiral benefits. The said amount is much higher
than what is calculated in para.4 of the counter affidavit. The
details of the calculation has been stated in para.7 of the writ
petition. Nonetheless, the amount so admitted by the respondents,
must be paid to the petitioner within a stipulated time and for rest
of the amount, let a direction be given to respondent No.1 to
decide the claim of the present petitioner in accordance with law.
4) Counsel for the respondents submitted that they have no much
objection to make payment of the aforesaid amount, but some time
may be given and if there is any further grievance left to the
petitioner, a representation may be preferred by him within a
stipulated time which will be decided by respondent No.1 in
accordance with law.
2
5) In view of this limited submission and looking to para.4 of the
counter affidavit, it appears that the respondents have admitted the
amount payable to the petitioner at Rs.6,96,230/. This amount
will be paid in six Equal Monthly Instalments from the date of
receipt of a copy of this order by the respondents to the petitioner.
However, for rest of the claim, the petitioner will file a detailed
representation before respondent No.1 within two weeks from
today and upon receipt of the same, respondent No.1 will decide
rest of the claim of the petitioner within a period of twelve weeks
thereafter.
6) With the aforesaid directions and observations, this writ petition is
disposed of.
(D. N. Patel, J)
Manoj/cp.2