SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2005 Supreme(Jhk) 486

SUDHANSU JYOTI MUKHOPADHAYA
Kanahiya Prasad – Appellant
Versus
State Of Jharkhand – Respondent


ORDER

S.J. Mukhopadhaya, J.

1. This writ application has been preferred by the petitioner for a direction on the respondents to pay him the total retiral benefits, such as, pension, gratuity, leave encashment, GPF, and other dues, to which he is entitled.

2. According to the petitioner, he was in the services of the State and retired from the post of Junior Engineer on 31st May, 2004, while posted in National Highways Division-I, Dhanbad. According to him, at the time of superannuation, one Mr. Narendra Prasad Singh, Junior Engineer, National Highways Division, Mahuda, Dhanbad, was asked to take charge from the petitioner. It is alleged that inspite of repeated orders and direction, given by the higher authorities, said Sri Narendra Prasad Singh did not take charge from the petitioner, as a result of which, No Objection having not been issued, the petitioner has not been paid the retiral benefits since last one year.

3. Having heard learned counsel for the parties, as I find that the matter requires determination firstly by the respondents, instead of asking them to file counter-affidavit, the case is remitted with a direction to the Chief Engineer, Road Construction Department, Nation





Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top