High CourtsSingle Bench

Kamla Devi vs Jharkhand Mineral Area Development Authority And Ors

Jharkhand High Court · Decided on 26 May 2020 · Citation: (2020) 05 JH CK 0099

HON’BLE JUDGES
Sanjay Kumar Dwivedi, J
RESULT
Disposed Of
CASE NUMBER
Writ Petition(S) No.705 of 2019
Ask AI about this case

AI Structured Summary

Not yet generated for this judgment

No AI summary yet

Generate an eight-section analysis of this judgment — facts, issues, reasoning, ratio and a plain-language gist.

Judgment

7 paragraphs · 720 words
1.

Heard Mr. D.K. Malityar, the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and Mr. Santosh Kumar Jha, the learned A.C to Mr. Mahavir Pd. Sinha, the learned counsel appearing for the respondent-JMADA.

2.

This writ petition has been heard through Video Conferencing in view of the guidelines of the High Court taking into account the situation arising due to COVID-19 pandemic. None of the parties have complained about any technical snag of audio-video and with their consent this matter has been heard.

3.

The petitioner has preferred this writ petition for a direction upon the respondents to pay the petitioner all admitted dues of her deceased husband namely, Vishnudeo Prasad Sharma.

4.

Mr. D.K. Malityar, the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner submits that the husband of the petitioner joined the services under the respondent-MADA on 15.06.1958 and was removed from service with effect from 26.04.1990 from the post of Security Inspector, JMADA, Dhanbad. He submits that the said order was challenged before the Patna High Court, in Ranchi Bench, Ranchi which was disposed of by order dated 19.03.1997 passed in C.W.J.C No.862 of 1990(R) whereby the order of dismissal was replaced by the order of removal from the service. He further submits that by order dated 12.05.1997 the dismissal order passed on 26.04.1990 was replaced by order of removal from service of the petitioner's husband on 25.04.1990 and her husband was directed to collect his dues. The quarter in question was also vacated by the husband of the petitioner. The husband of the petitioner filed several representations before the respondent concerned requesting therein for making the payment of all the admitted dues. By order dated 03.12.1998 a sum of Rs.95,514.09 was paid to the petitioner's husband on account provident fund balance. He further submits that a sum of Rs.40,132/- was wrongly deducted towards electricity bill. He further submits that when the dues in question were not released in favour of the petitioner's husband, the husband of the petitioner again moved before this Court in W.P.(S) No.6061 of 2005 for a direction for payment of admitted dues which was disposed of with a direction to the respondents to release the entire admitted dues legally payable to the petitioner within two months with statutory interest. It was also observed that for further grievance the petitioner may file a fresh representation before the Managing Director of the respondent authority who shall consider the same and shall pass the appropriate order in accordance with law. Unfortunately, the husband of the petitioner died on 09.04.2006 leaving behind his widow who is the petitioner in the present writ petition. After the death of the husband of the petitioner he has preferred a representation before the respondent no.2 on 12.06.2006 enclosing the Death certificate requesting therein to pay all admitted dues of her deceased husband as she is facing acute financial problem after the death of her husband. He further submits that the petitioner filed several representation, but the admitted dues have not been released in favour of the petitioner as yet which include provident fund, gratuity, unutilized leave encashment, arrears of salary, group insurance amount and other lawful and legal dues.

5.

Mr. Santosh Kumar Jha, the learned A.C to Mr. Mahavir Pd. Sinha, the learned counsel appearing for the respondent-JMADA fairly submits that if the petitioner will file the representation before the respondent no.2, the respondent no.2 will consider the case of the petitioner and shall pass the appropriate order and if she is found entitled for the benefit that will be released as per the scheme of the respondent-JMADA for the retired employees.

6.

In view of the above facts and submissions of the learned counsel appearing for the respondent-JMADA, the instant writ petition is disposed of with a direction to the petitioner to file a fresh representation before the respondent no.2 within six weeks from today. The respondent no.2 will take a final call on the representation of the petitioner and if he thinks that there are admitted dues to be released in favour of the petitioner, the same shall be released in view of the scheme framed by the respondent-JMADA for payment of retiral dues to the employees within a period of six weeks thereafter.

7.

With the above observation and direction, W.P.(S) No.705 of 2019 stands disposed of.