High CourtsSingle Bench

Santosh Kumar Mahto vs State of Jharkhand and Others

Jharkhand High Court · Decided on 27 April 2004 · Citation: (2005) 1 JCR 388

HON’BLE JUDGES
Amareshswar Sahay, J
CASE NUMBER
Writ Petition (S) No. 2216 of 2004

AI Structured Summary

Not yet generated for this judgment

Judgment

4 paragraphs · 201 words

Amreshwar Sahay, J.—Heard the parties.

2.

The petitioner retired as Headmaster on 30.11.2003. The grievance of the petitioner in this writ application is that he has not been paid the retiral dues e.g. Pension, Gratuity, Leave Encashment, General Provident Fund, LIC alongwith the statutory interest, though he has submitted all the relevant papers to the concerned respondents on 26.12.2003. It is further stated that by his letter dated 23.02.2004 and 18.03.2004, he has already represented to the District Superintendent of Education, Ranchi as well as the Deputy Commissioner, Ranchi, which was duly received by those authorities but nothing has been done in this matter and no step has been taken by the respondents for the payment of his retiral dues.

3.

Considering the facts and circumstances of this case, this application is being disposed of with a direction to the respondent No. 2 - District Superintendent of Education, Ranchi, and the respondent No. 5 - Deputy Commissioner, Ranchi to look into-the matter personally and to pass an appropriate order releasing the retiral dues of the petitioner within a period of four weeks from receipt/production of a copy of this order.

With the above observation and direction this application stands disposed of.