Sri Amrendra Kumar Ojha v. The Life Insurance Corporation Of India

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.6883 of 2022 ====================================================== Sri Amrendra Kumar Ojha S/o Late Hari Ganesh Ojha, Resident of Vill.- Murthan, P.O. - Parmanandpur, P.S. - Sonepur, Saran (Chhapra) at present resident of K- 107, P.C. Colony, Hanuman Nagar, P.O. - Lohiyanagar, Kankarbagh, P.S. - Patrakar Nagar, District- Patna. ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

1.

The Life Insurance Corporation of India through its Chairman, Central Office Yogakshema Jeevan Bima Marg, Mumbai - 400020. 2.

The Executive Director (Personnel), Life Insurance Corporation of India, Central Office, 'Yogakshema', Jeevan Bima Marg, Mumbai- 400021. 3.

The Zonal Manager, Life Insurance Corporation of India, East Central Zone, 'Jeevan Deep', (5th Floor) Exhibition Road, Patna - 800001. 4.

Shri Deepak Kumar Sinha, the then Principal, Sales Training Centre, Life Insurance Corporation of India, 'Jeevan Prakash', Fraser Road, Patna - 800001.

5.

The Shri Mithilesh Kumar Sinha, the then Manager (OS), Life Insurance Corporation of India, Patna Division- 1, 'Jeevan Prakash', Fraser Road, Patna - 800001.

... ... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Amrendra Kumar Ojha ( In Person ) For the Respondent/s :

Mr.Rakesh Kumar, Advocate Mr. Abhimanyu Vatsa, Advocate Mr. Rajni Kant Singh, Advocate ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MOHIT KUMAR SHAH ORAL ORDER 23-01-2024 The present writ petition has been filed seeking the following reliefs:- "1. i. For issuance of appropriate writ/writs in the nature of Mandamus writ whereby and whereunder the respondents did not take cognizance on the several complaints filed by the petitioner.

2/4 ii. For issuance of the Mandamus directions to the respondents to enquire into the matter of innumerous validations of his own attendance (Respondent No.-4) for the days of his own absence for which he is absent from the office and also to enquire into the matter of intentional withhold of Meal Coupons of the petitioner in the months of March and April, 2017 without any justified reasons.

iii. For issuance of Mandamus directions to the respondents to take actions and initiate the departmental proceedings against the Respondent No.4 for taking bribe of Rs. 2,00,000/- (Two lakh) from one Rajendra Prasad, the then Administrative Officer, Sales Training Centre for unlawful permission to Sri Prasad and managing the Zonal Office etc. to resume his duties after a long gap of three and half years (from his duties since 12.11.2013) by way of violating all the norms, rules and regulations of the Life Insurance Corporation of India (Staff) Regulation, 1960 by the Respondent No.-4.

iv. For issuance of Mandamus directions to the respondents for

3/4 taking actions and also to initiate the proceedings against the Respondent No.4 for illegal permission to his Administrative Officer Shri Rajendra Prasad to resume his duties after a long gap of three and half years who was willfully absent from offices since 12.11.2013 without intimation and permission of the competent authority.

v. For issuance of direction to the relevant respondents to release the Meal Coupons worth Rs.3510/- to the petitioner with penal interest which was intentionally withheld by the Respondent No.4 in the month of March and April,2017.

vi. For issuance of Mandamus direction to the Respondent for appropriate enquiry into the matter of allegations made against the Respondent No. 4 regarding misuse of Concurrencia and @ Fraudulent financial gains and no actions against the complaints dated 10.03.2017, 17.04.2017, 05.05.2017, 09.05.2017, 19.06.2017 etc. filed by the petitioner before the authorities concerned.

vii. For issuance of Mandamus directions to the respondents

4/4 concerned to enquire into the matter of refusal to receive the requests of the petitioner."

2.

After some arguments, the petitioner, who is appearing in person, realising the fact that the present writ petition involves disputed question of facts and alternative efficacious remedy is available to him, seeks not to press the present writ petition, however, seeks liberty to avail such other alternative remedies as are otherwise available under the law, for redressal of the aforesaid grievances. Liberty, so sought, is granted.

3.

The writ petition stands dismissed as not pressed.

(Mohit Kumar Shah, J) S.Sb/- U