w w w . L a w y e r S e r v i c e s . i n



Rajendra Prasad Rao v/s Heavy Engineering Corporation Limited, Dhurwa, Ranchi

    Writ Petition (S) No. 2798 of 2015

    Decided On, 02 January 2019

    At, High Court of Jharkhand

    By, THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SUJIT NARAYAN PRASAD

    For the Appearing Parties: S. Garapati, Piyush Chitresh, Advocates.



Judgment Text

1. Learned counsel for the petitioner has sought for to make necessary correction in the cause title of the writ petition of respondent No. 2 i.e. the Chairman-cum-Managing Director, Heavy Engineering Corporation Limited, Dhurwa, Ranchi hence, it has wrongly been typed as The Chief Managing Director, Heavy Engineering Corporation Limited, Dhurwa, Ranchi.

2. Accordingly, counsel for the petitioner is directed to make necessary correction in the cause title of writ petition in course of day of respondent No.2.

3. This writ petition has been filed for direction upon the respondents to disburse the amount of Rs.2,06,960/- due, in lieu of leave encashment for 300 days alongwith difference of arrears of salary in consequence of Pay Revision, arising out of 2006/07 wages Pay Revision payable w.e.f. 01.01.2009 alongwith the interest accrued thereon.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the amount related to leave encashment for 300 days has been admitted, as evident from Annexure-3 to the writ petition, but the same has not yet been paid. He further submits that the petitioner is entitled to get the difference of arrears of salary on account of pay revision payable, w.e.f. 01.01.2009 by virtue of circular No. 08/2013 dated 30.10.2013 which has also yet not been paid.

5. Learned counsel further submits that despite no counter-affidavit has been filed in this case, therefore, the writ petition may be disposed of directing the authority concerned to take necessary action with respect to redressal of his grievance.

6. Learned counsel for the respondent-HEC has submitted that although counter-affidavit has not been filed in this case, however, he submits that the writ petition may be disposed of directing the authorities concerned to take into consideration the grievance of the petitioner and take decision regarding the disbursement of the aforesaid amount, if admissible.

7. After hearing learned counsel for the respective parties, in view of such prayer, without delving into the merit of the matter, the writ petition is disposed of giving liberty to the petitioner to file a fresh representation before the respondent No. 2, Heavy Engineering Corporation Limited, Dhurwa, Ranchi ventilating his grievance along with relevant documents within a period of two weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. On receipt of the such representation, the respondent authority shall do the needful pertaining to admissible dues and take decision in this regard within a period of six weeks.

8. Needless to say that, if the claim of the petitioner regarding grant of admissible dues is found to be genuine, the consequential benef

Please Login To View The Full Judgment!

it shall be paid to the petitioner within a period of three weeks and in case of any adverse decision, the same shall be communicated to the petitioner forthwith by passing a reasoned order within the aforesaid period. 9. With the aforesaid direction, the writ petition stands disposed of.
O R