Kamta Sinha vs Bihar State Food & Civil Supply Corporation Ltd. and Others

Aparesh Kumar Singh, J.—Heard learned counsel for the parties.

The petitioner has retired as Deputy Manager from Sasaram under the office of Bihar State Food & Civil Supply Corporation Ltd. on 30th November, 2009. He was initially appointed on 2nd February, 1975 on the post of Assistant Godown Manager and thereafter was transferred and also promoted to the post of Deputy Manager in the Respondent-Corporation till his retirement from Sasaram.

According to the petitioner, for certain periods during which he served in the office of District Manager, State Food Corporation, Dhanbad, the amounts advanced to him though were sought to be adjusted by submission of bills, but apparently the respondent No. 5, District Manger, State Food Corporation Dhanbad has not issued No Dues Certificate to the petitioner, which is one of the reasons for withholding of post retirement benefits.

The other grievance of the petitioner is that vide Annexure-1, the petitioner has been informed that certain amounts totaling Rs. 5,96,727.97 Paise is to be deposited by him in the office of Corporation as the amount found is shortage or misappropriated while in service by the petitioner inclusive of interest thereupon. According to the learned counsel for the petitioner, his post retirement benefits have not yet been released due to threat issued vide letter dated 8th January, 2010 of such deduction and also on account of non-issuance of No Dues Certificate by respondent No. 5. The petitioner has sought to rely upon Annexures-3 to 6, which are requests made by the petitioner or by respondent No. 4 also to verify the advances made by the petitioner against bills submitted by him, so that his retiral dues can be paid. The petitioner has, therefore, been compelled to move this Court.

Though time was allowed to the respondent to file an affidavit on 10th February, 2012 itself, but no counter affidavit has been filed by the respondent. Learned counsel for the Respondent-Bihar State Food & Civil Supply Corporation Ltd. and Jharkhand State Food & Civil Supply Corporation both inform the Court that bifurcation of the erstwhile Bihar State Food & Civil Supply Corporation Ltd. has taken place with effect from 1st February, 2011 i.e. after retirement of the petitioner.

I have heard learned counsel for the parties and in the aforesaid state of facts, it appears that the claim of post retirement benefits of the petitioner are dependent upon issuance of No Dues Certificate by the office of respondent No. 5, where the petitioner claims to have served for certain periods and also was paid advances in respect of which he also claims to have submitted bills. Therefore, this issue of facts, in the absence of any counter affidavit by the respondent cannot be decided in the present writ application. The petitioner is, therefore, directed to approach the District Manager, State Food Corporation, Dhanbad, respondent No. 5 with all supporting facts and documents in respect of his claim that the amounts advanced to him have been duly explained by way of bills relating to execution of works etc. On appearance of petitioner, the respondent No. 5, District Manager, State Food Corporation, Dhanbad would examine the claim of the petitioner together with all relevant records maintained in their office and if it is found that the claim of the petitioner is genuine and acceptable, he would issue No Dues Certificate in favour of the petitioner. However, if the respondent No. 5 finds otherwise, reasons may be indicated by a specific order passed in that respect within a period of 10 weeks from the date of appearance of the petitioner. Dependant upon such decision, the petitioner is allowed liberty to approach before respondent No. 2, Managing Director, Bihar State Food & Civil Supply Corporation Ltd. for processing his claim regarding post retirement benefits again duly supported with all documents and No Dues Certificate etc. The respondent No. 2, Managing Director, Bihar State Food & Civil Supply Corporation Ltd. on receipt of such representation would consider the same, in accordance with law, and after due verification of all relevant documents take a decision thereupon within a period of 12 weeks, which shall also be communicated to him. If the respondent No. 2 finds that any advances against the petitioner have remained unexplained then an opportunity be granted to the petitioner to explain the same in person. Needless to say that the petitioner should cooperate in the said exercise.

Dependant upon such decision, the admissible post retirement dues and other service dues of the petitioner be released thereafter without any unreasonable delay along with statutory interest, if any.

Accordingly, the writ petition stands disposed of.