The need for the petitioner to provide specific claims with supporting documents and materials for unpaid arrears of salary, and the obligation of the Managing Director of BISCOMAUN to consider and decide the representation within six months.

A counter affidavit on behalf of the contesting respondents is being filed today during the course of hearing of the case. Let it be kept on record.

2. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respondent no. 2 to 4. However, none is appearing on behalf of the respondent no.1, though name of the learned State Counsel is printed in the daily cause list.

3. The petitioner having retired from the service of the respondent BISCOMAUN from the post of Regional Coal Marketing Officer on 31.07.2000, has filed the present writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for the reliefs enumerated in paragraph-1 of the writ petition, which reads as follows:-

“1. That, this is an application for issuance of an appropriate writ/ order/ direction commanding the respondents to pay the following arrears of salary and other dues to the petitioner:

i. Monthly salary from January 1998 to July 2000 including dearness and interim relief as applicable as per employees of the State Government;

ii. Arrear of dearness from July 95, January’96, July’96 and January’97;

iii. Arrear of interim relief for the period 1.4.95, 1.4.96 and 1.4.98 @ 10% each total 30% of salary;

iv. And arrear of Provident fund from January 1998 to July 2000 for the period salary has not been paid;

v. Interest on above due to delay in payment.”

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner had approached this Court earlier in CWJC No. 13644 of 2000 for various reliefs, as detailed in the aforesaid writ petition, which was finally disposed of by a Bench of this Court by an order dated 02.01.2001 (Annexure-1) with a direction to the petitioner to file a fresh representation for redressal of his valid grievances, which was directed to be considered and disposed of by a reasoned order by the authority concerned. The petitioner claims to have filed a representation, whereafter several retiral benefits were granted to the petitioner. However, payment of salary for the period in question was not made to him. In the aforesaid background the petitioner filed MJC No. 2104 of 2001, which was disposed of by a Bench of this Court by an order dated 17.02.2004 (Annexure-2) with a direction that remaining dues relating to the arrears of salary to the petitioner shall be paid in order of seniority as and when fund is made available to the respondent BISCOMAUN. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that despite aforesaid direction payment of arrears of salary was not made to the petitioner. Therefore, the present writ petition has been filed by the writ petitioner.

5. The present writ petition was filed as far back as on 27.11.2006 and the matter remained pending since then. In the light of the previous orders passed by this Court, a counter affidavit has been filed today on behalf of the contesting respondents. In paragraph-4 of the counter-affidavit details of payment made to the petitioner have been given. In paragraph-5 of the counter affidavit, it has been claimed that according to the calculation made by the respondents no dues of the petitioner now remains to be paid by the respondents to him. However, it has further been pointed out in paragraph-5 of the counter-affidavit itself that if the petitioner is not satisfied with the aforesaid calculation and details of payment, then he may file a fresh representation detailing his specific claims head wise and if such claims are raised, then the same shall be considered and redressed by the respondent BISCOMAUN and its functionaries in accordance with law.

6. In view of the fair stand taken by the contesting respondents in their counter affidavit and in view of the claims made by the petitioner that the arrears of salary for the period in question have not been paid to him till date, this Court is of the opinion that the petitioner should file a fresh representation with all supporting documents and materials in support of his specific claims before the resp