Skip to content
How to use Judgment tools
  1. Click Tools to open PDF, Print, Tag, Note, Favourite, and CiteSignal.
  2. Use Brief & Ask in the toolbar for the AI Brief and case chat.
  3. Jump to sections with the pills below the help bar.

Dropadi Devi Vs. Jharkhand State Electricity Board Through Its Secretary and ors.

Dropadi Devi vs Jharkhand State Electricity Board Through Its Secretary and ors.

Type Court Judgment Court Jharkhand Decided Feb 02, 2005
~2 min read
https://sooperkanoon.com/case/519016

For advocates & juniors · 7-day free trial

Brief this judgment before chambers

Stop skimming 50 pages - get an 18-section AI Brief on this case, ask scoped follow-ups, and find related precedents with Semantic Search. Full trial, no card required.

  • 18-section brief - facts, issues, ratio, relief
  • Ask this case - answers cite the judgment
  • Semantic search - find precedents by meaning
  • Research drawer - sections, cites, related cases

No card required · credentials emailed · Log in if you already have an account

Citation
Court
Jharkhand High Court
Judge
Decided On
Case Number
WP (S) No. 1268 of 2003
Subject
Electricity

Case Summary

AI-generated summary - not the official court judgment text.

- Order 47, Rule 1: [Tarun Chatterjee & H.L. Dattu, JJ] Pension claim - Qualifying service - Claim by petitioner to count earlier service rendered in Co-operative institutions was rejected - Review petition rejected on ground that there was no error apparent on face of the record -Documents filed along with review p...

Key legal issue
Electricity

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

Dropadi Devi

Advocate P.K. Verma, Adv.; Ashok Kumar Jha, Adv.

Respondent

Jharkhand State Electricity Board Through Its Secretary and ors.

Advocate Ajit Kumar,; D.K. Pathak,; Navin Kumar and;

Legal References

Reported In
[2005(4)JCR264(Jhr)]

Excerpt

- order 47, rule 1: [tarun chatterjee & h.l. dattu, jj] pension claim - qualifying service - claim by petitioner to count earlier service rendered in co-operative institutions was rejected - review petition rejected on ground that there was no error apparent on face of the record -documents filed along with review petition was not considered supreme court in order to do complete justice directed high court to reconsider review petition by taking on record documents filed along with the review petition. orderr.k. merathia, j.1. heard the parties.2. petitioner has prayed for a direction upon the respondents to make payment of the entire retiral benefits of her deceased husband, namely, yugal thakur, with interest.3. learned counsel appearing for the jharkhand state electricity board and bihar state electricity board submitted that the entire retiral dues have been paid.4. learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that petitioner retired in 1999 and payment of gpf amount was sanctioned in 2001 but actual payment was made on 22.1.2004. he further submitted that it is not clear whether statutory interest accrued on gpf amount till the date of payment has been paid or not.5. learned counsel for the jseb submitted that after creation of jharkhand, there has been some delay in payment of retiral dues to the petitioner and therefore, board may not be directed to pay interest on retiral dues. however, petitioner is entitled to statutory interest on gpf amount till the date of payment.6. in the circumstances, prayer for interest due to delayed payment of retiral benefits is not allowed. however, the respondents are directed to see that statutory interest on gpf amount is paid till the date of actual payment. the jharkhand state electricity board is also directed to supply a calculation chart to the petitioner about the payment of gpf and statutory interest paid thereon within two months from today. if the statutory interest on the gpf has not been paid up to the date of payment of gpf, the same will also be paid to the petitioner along with calculation thereof within the same time.with these observations and directions, this writ petition is disposed of.

Full Judgment

ORDER

R.K. Merathia, J.

1. Heard the parties.

2. Petitioner has prayed for a direction upon the respondents to make payment of the entire retiral benefits of her deceased husband, namely, Yugal Thakur, with interest.

3. Learned counsel appearing for the Jharkhand State Electricity Board and Bihar State Electricity Board submitted that the entire retiral dues have been paid.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that petitioner retired in 1999 and payment of GPF amount was sanctioned in 2001 but actual payment was made on 22.1.2004. He further submitted that it is not clear whether statutory interest accrued on GPF amount till the date of payment has been paid or not.

5. Learned counsel for the JSEB submitted that after creation of Jharkhand, there has been some delay in payment of retiral dues to the petitioner and therefore, Board may not be directed to pay interest on retiral dues. However, petitioner is entitled to statutory interest on GPF amount till the date of payment.

6. In the circumstances, prayer for interest due to delayed payment of retiral benefits is not allowed. However, the respondents are directed to see that statutory interest on GPF amount is paid till the date of actual payment. The Jharkhand State Electricity Board is also directed to supply a calculation chart to the petitioner about the payment of GPF and statutory interest paid thereon within two months from today. If the statutory interest on the GPF has not been paid up to the date of payment of GPF, the same will also be paid to the petitioner along with calculation thereof within the same time.

With these observations and directions, this writ petition is disposed of.

Continue Your Research


AI Briefs · Semantic Search · Save & annotate judgments

Start your 7-day free trial