CourtKutchehry.com
High CourtsDivision Bench

Rajendra Singh vs State of M.P. and Others

Madhya Pradesh High Court · Decided on 9 December 2011 · Citation: (2011) 12 MP CK 0034

HON’BLE JUDGES
Vimla Jain, J · K.K. Lahoti, J
RESULT
Allowed
CASE NUMBER
R.P. No. 508 of 2011
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

11 paragraphs · 354 words
1.

In W.P. No. 16264/2006, the petitioner had sought following reliefs :

1.

That, the respondent no. 1 to 3 may command to pay the amount to the petitioner of his family benefit fund Rs. 11,747/- alongwith the interest as accrued in accordance with law.

2.

The respondent further be pleased to command to pay the amount Rs. 9994/- as sanctioned and ordered by the A.G. Office, M.P. Gwalior, vide annexure P/6.

3.

Any other relief for which the petitioner be found entitled in view of the facts and circumstances of the case may kindly also be granted including cost of this petition.

2.

It is submitted that the matter was decided on 28.6.2008, in which only one prayer was granted in respect of the interest on delayed payment, but in respect of other two reliefs no order was passed, while the petitioner is entitled for aforesaid amount of family benefits and retiral dues. It is submitted by the petitioner that the petitioner be permitted to file a fresh representation to the respondents for grant of aforesaid dues and the respondents may be directed to consider and decide the aforesaid representation, and to this extend this review petition may be allowed.

3.

Shri Pathak, learned counsel for State submits that in case of filing of such representation, respondents shall re-examine in respect of any amount due to the petitioner towards family benefits and retiral claims, as claimed by the petitioner in the writ petition and in this regard representation of petitioner shall be considered expeditiously.

4.

In view of aforesaid, we dispose of this review petition with following directions :

1.

Petitioner may submit a fresh representation for ventilation of the aforesaid grievance to the respondents, who shall consider the case of petitioner expeditiously, as far as possible within a period of six months from the date of filing of representation.

2.

In case the grievance of petitioner is not redressed or the petitioner remains dissatisfied with the aforesaid decision, petitioner shall be at liberty to agitate his case before the appropriate forum afresh.

5.

No order as to costs.

C.C., as per rules.