Bhawdas Ramteke v. Chhattisgarh State Ware Housing Corporation

-1NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPS No. 6185 of 2017 Bhawdas Ramteke S/o Late Shri Bhabu Rao Ramteke, Aged About 62 Years R/o Dr, Ambedkar Nagar, Urla Ward No. 18, Durg District Durg Chhattisgarh.

---- Petitioner

Versus

1. Chhattisgarh State Ware Housing Corporation Through Managing Director, Head Office Industrial Building Third Floor, Ring Road No. 1 Raipur District Raipur Chhattisgarh.

2. Manager, Accountant / Technical / Commercial / Karmik, Chhattisgarh State Ware Housing Corporation, Head Office, Raipur, District Raipur Chhattisgarh ---Respondents For Petitioner :

Mr. Rajbahadur Singh, Advocate For Respondent :

Mr. B.D. Guru, Advocate Hon'ble Shri Justice P. Sam Koshy Order on Board 03/12/2018

1. The limited prayer, which the petitioner has sought for in the present writ petition is for an appropriate direction to the respondents to release his retiral dues payable to him with interest.

2. The facts of the case is that the petitioner, who was working with the respondents as an Assistant under the respondents, stood retired from service w.e.f. 30.06.2017. Though more than 1 1⁄2 years have passed, the petitioner has till date not received any retiral dues from the respondents.

3. The petitioner submits that he is facing much difficulties to make both ends meat as subsequent to 30.06.2017, he does not have money for his sustenance.

4. Mr. Guru, Advocate appearing under instructions of the respondents submits that the dues payable to the petitioner could not be settled on account of certain disputes, which the respondent No.1 has with the Food

-2Corporation of India as well as the Civil Supplies Corporation of India in respect of shortage/loss of stock.

5. On a query being put to the counsel for the respondents, he fairly admits the employment of the petitioner with the respondents. He also fairly concedes that till the date of superannuation, there was no disciplinary proceeding initiated against the petitioner for any shortage whatsoever, nor was he charge-sheeted for any loss caused to the respondentscorporation, neither is there any correspondence made by the employer directly implicating the petitioner responsible for any sort of loss or shortage caused.

6. Given the aforesaid fair statement by the counsel appearing for the respondents, this Court does not find any good reason, why the petitioner on his superannuation should not be entitled for his retiral dues, which otherwise he is entitled for.

7. Given the said facts and circumstances of the case, the present writ petition deserves to be and is accordingly allowed with a direction that the respondents shall ensure that the entire retiral dues payable to the petitioner is paid within a period of 90 days from the date of receipt of the copy of this order.

8. Except for the GPF amount, all other amounts that would be paid to the petitioner shall also carry interest @ 6% p.a. from the date it fell due, till the date of actual payment.

9. The writ petition accordingly stands allowed and disposed off. Sd/- (P. Sam Koshy) Judge Ved