Bela Jha vs State Of Jharkhand

Anubha Rawat Choudhary, J

Learned senior counsel for the petitioner Mr. V.P. Singh has advanced his argument today. He submits that there is serious dispute as to whether

the amount which is impugned in the present case is recoverable from the petitioner or not. The amount itself is in dispute and accordingly such

recovery order could not have been issued. Learned senior counsel has also submitted that the original writ petitioner has expired and the wife of the

petitioner has been substituted in the present case who is pursuing the case.

Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the State of Jharkhand Mr. Satyam Parmar, Junior counsel to learned counsel Ms. Neelam Tiwari, submits

that he does not have the copy of the counter affidavit filed by the respondent No. 5 which is dated 03.07.2012. Learned counsel for the State has also

submitted that he would advance his argument tomorrow, if the copy of the counter affidavit filed by the respondent No. 5 provided to him during the

course of the day.

Upon this, learned counsel for the petitioner undertakes to provide a copy of the counter affidavit to the learned counsel for the respondents during

the course of the day.

Learned counsel for the State of Bihar is also present. He submits that apparently, the matter relates to payment of GPF to the petitioner. However,

he also seeks adjournment and prays that the matter be posted tomorrow.

Accordingly, matter is adjourned to be listed on 15.02.2022 for further hearing to be taken up at 10.30 A.M.