Chanchal Kr. Kar v. Jute Corporation Of India And ANR
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.10487 of 2015 ====================================================== Chanchal Kr. Kar son of Late Nepal Chandra Kar resident of Hansda Road, Gulabbagh, P.O.- Gulabbagh, District- Purnia .... .... Petitioner
Versus
1. Jute Corporation of India, through Perssonnel Manager, Regd. & Head Office, 15 N, Nellu Sengupta Sarani, 7th Floor, Kolkata-700087,.
2. Regional Manager, Jute Corporation of India Regional Office, N.H.31 Purnea, District- Purnea,
3. The Personnel Manager, Head Office, 15 N, Nellu Sengupta Sarani, 7th Floor, Kolkata-700087,.
.... .... Respondents ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner : Mr. Vikram Singh, Advocate ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE DR. JUSTICE RAVI RANJAN ORAL ORDER 28-07-2015 As prayed, the petitioner is permitted to implead the Personnel Manager, Head Office, 15 N, Nellu Sengupta Sarani, 7th Floor, Kolkata-700087, as respondent no. 3 in this writ application.
It is submitted on behalf of the petitioner that after his retirement on 14.01.2013 from the opposite of the Manager, Depot of Gulabbagh Branch of the Jute Corporation of India, Purnea, he has been given all the retiral dues except encashment of leave salary. It is submitted that a representation has been given to the Regional Manager I/c, Jute Corporation of India a copy of which has been appended as Annexure 3 to this writ application with a copy of the same to the respondent no. 3.
Patna High Court CWJC No.10487 of 2015 (3) dt.28-07-2015 In above view of the matter, this writ application is being disposed of without going into the merit of the case with a liberty to the petitioner to file a fresh representation before the respondent no. 3 clearly setting out his claim along with the documents, if any, in support of his contention. On such representation having been filed by the petitioner along with a copy of this order, let the respondent no. 3 consider the same and take a decision on its own merit and in accordance with law preferably within a period of six weeks from the date of its filing. If the petitioner is found entitled for payment of the aforesaid head then immediate step for payment of the same should be taken by the authority concerned. (Dr. Ravi Ranjan, J) SC/- U