High CourtsSingle Bench

Triloki Mishra vs Mineral Area Development Authority And Ors

Jharkhand High Court · Decided on 3 March 2021 · Citation: (2021) 03 JH CK 0060

HON’BLE JUDGES
Sanjay Kumar Dwivedi, J
RESULT
Disposed Of
CASE NUMBER
Writ Petition (S) No. 3366 of 2020
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

18 paragraphs · 346 words

Heard Mr. Tarun Kumar No. 1, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. Mahavir Prasad Sinha, learned counsel for respondents-JMADA.

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.

The petitioner has preferred this writ petition for direction upon the respondents for payment of arrear of ACP, arrear of difference amount of sixth

pay revision and other retiral benefits along with interest.

Mr. Tarun Kumar No. 1, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that earlier the petitioner has filed W.P.(S) No. 3725 of 2014 which was disposed

of with direction to the respondent-JMADA to consider the case of the petitioner and to pass reasoned order. Pursuant thereto certain amount has

been paid to the petitioner but the amount as prayed in the writ petition is still due.

Mr. Mahavir Pd. Sinha, learned counsel for respondents-JMADA submits that the retiral dues as prayed in the writ petition is vague in nature and

there is no specific averment with regard to retiral dues.

In view of above facts and considering that atleast prayer for payment of arrear of ACP and arrear of difference amount of sixth pay revision is there

in the writ petition, this writ petition is being disposed of with direction to the petitioner to file fresh representation before respondent no.3 disclosing the

due amount in detail under the various heads within two weeks from today. If such representation is filed within the aforesaid period the respondent

no.3 shall take decision in consultation with respondent no. 2 and pass reasoned order within a period of eight weeks thereafter. It goes without saying

that if the decision is taken in favour of the petitioner, the benefit of the same shall be accrued in favour of the petitioner within a period of further six

weeks thereafter.

With the above observations and directions, this writ petition stands disposed of.