High CourtsSingle Bench(2021) 02 JH CK 0041

Ram Vyas Prasad vs State of Jharkhand And Ors

Jharkhand High Court · Decided on 3 February 2021

HON’BLE JUDGES
Deepak Roshan, J
RESULT
Disposed Of
CASE NUMBER
Writ Petition(S) No.5923 Of 2008

CourtKutchehry membership

More clarity. Every judgment.

Download court copies, explore connected cases and make more of every research session.

Loading membership options…

Ask AI about this case

AI Structured Summary

Not yet generated for this judgment

Judgment

21 paragraphs · 369 words
1.

Heard learned counsel for the parties through V.C.

2.

The instant writ application has been preferred by the petitioner for following reliefs:-

(a) To pay the full and final pension from August, 2007 onwards after adjusting the amount of provisional pension paid.

(b) To pay the amount of commuted value of pension.

(c) To pay the amount of full and final Gratuity after adjusting the amount of provisional gratuity paid.

(d) To pay the entire amount of the General Provident Fund along with the applicable statutory interest thereon till the date of payment.

(e) To send the statement in respect of deductions made from the salary of the petitioner on account of the General Provident Fund for the period

from 1991-92 to 2007-08 to the District Provident Fund Officer, Rohtas, Sasaram (Bihar).

(f) To send the service book of the petitioner to the Office of the Junior Plant Protection Officer, Ranchi.

(g) To pay arrears of salary of the petitioner with effect from 09.08.1999 to 31.07.2007 on account of the 2nd Financial Upgradation allowed to him

under the ACP Scheme.

3.

Mr. Arvind Kumar, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that in spite of his best efforts; he could not seek latest instruction from his client

about the present position. However, from counter affidavit it appears that amount as claimed in the instant writ application has been paid to the

petitioner as such the instant writ application may be disposed of by giving liberty to the petitioner to represent before the concerned authority, if at all

any amount still remains to be paid.

4.

Mr. Rahul Saboo, learned counsel for the respondent-State does not have any objection.

5.

In view of the limited submission advanced by the learned counsel for the petitioner, the instant writ application, is hereby, disposed of by giving

liberty to the petitioner to approach the concerned authority, if at all any amount has not been paid, by filing a representation and the same shall be

disposed of by the concerned authority after verifying the records of the case within a period of four months from the date of receipt of such

representation.

6.

With the aforesaid terms the instant writ application stands disposed of.