Jai Prakash Singh Vs. the Mineral Area Development Authority Represented Through Its Managing Director and anr - Court Judgment

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCH W. P. ( S) No. 337 of 2013 With W. P. ( S) No. 2442 of 2013 Kaimuddin Ansari ...Petitioner (W. P. ( S) No. 337 of 2013) Jai Prakash Singh ............Petitioner (W. P. ( S) No. 2442 of 2013) -Versus- The Mineral Area Development Authority & Ors ..Respondents (both cases) --- CORAM : HONBLE MR. JUSTICE APARESH KUMAR SINGH --- For the Petitioner : Mr. Someshwar Roy, Adv.(W. P. ( S) No. 337 of 2013) For the Petitioner : Mr. Niranjan Singh, Adv.(W. P. ( S) No. 2442 of 2013) For the Respondents-MADA: M/s. Bhawesh Kumar, Ravi Kumar & Rahul Kamlesh, Advs. ---- 02/ 20.8.2013 Heard learned counsel for the parties. The petitioner ( in W.P.(S) No. 337 of 2013) is said to have retired on 31st May, 2012 while working as Shodhak from the services of the Respondents-Mineral Area Development Authority, Dhanbad. His grievance is that post retirement dues such as provident fund with contributory benefits, gratuity, leave encashment, group insurance, dearness allowance, benefits of 6th Pay Revision and benefits of A.C.P. etc. have not yet been paid to him, though he has made representation before the competent authority of M.A.D.A vide Annexure-2 Series dated 24th November, 2012 and 29th December, 2012. The petitioner (in W.P.(S) No. 2442 of 2013) is said to have retired on 31st September, 2012 while working as Health Supervisor from the services of the Respondents-Mineral Area Development Authority, Dhanbad. His grievance is that post retirement dues such as provident fund with interest, earned leave encashment, gratuity, group insurance, arrears of benefit of 6th Pay Revision, arrears of benefit of merger of 50% dearness allowance, arrears of area allowance, arrears of dearness allowances, arrears of interim relief, arrears of A.C.P. arrears of benefit of Central Pay scale pattern and arrears of stagnation increment have remained unpaid, though he has made representation before the competent authority of M.A.D.A vide Annexure-2 Series dated 23rd February, 2013. Therefore, the petitioners have been compelled to move this Court in respective writ petitions for directing the respondents to pay the post retirement dues. Learned counsel for the respondents-M.A.D.A, on the other hand, submits that the petitioners may be directed to approach the competent authority i.e. Managing Director, MADA, who may look into their grievances in accordance with law. In such circumstances, since the matters relate to payment of certain post retiral dues and other service benefits of the petitioners, the writ petition is disposed of by allowing the petitioners to prefer individual fresh representation before the Respondent-Managing Director, Mineral Area Development Authority, Dhanbad together with all supporting facts and documents within a period of 3 weeks for redressal of their aforesaid grievances relating to the payment of post retirement dues and others service benefits. On receipt of such representations, the Respondents- Managing Director, Mineral Area Development Authority, Dhanbad shall consider the same in accordance with law and after proper verification of the records of the petitioners, pass a reasoned and speaking order within a period of 12 weeks thereafter, which shall also be communicated to the individual petitioners. If the grievances of the petitioners are found to be genuine and they are entitled to legally admissible dues on account of post retirement dues and other service benefits, the same shall also be disbursed with statutory interest as per the Scheme framed by the Respondents- MADA, which is applicable to the retired employees of MADA. Accordingly, both the writ petitions are disposed of in the aforesaid term. (Aparesh Kumar Singh, J) jk