Ramsevak Mandal v. South Eastern Coal Fields Ltd. And ORS.
NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR W.P. (S) No.
of 20 Ramsevak Mandal, aged 54 years, S/o Shri S. Mandal, R/o Quarter No.1-B-14, Vishrampur Colliery, Tehsil Surajpur, District Surguja (C.G.) ---- Petitioner
Versus
1. South Eastern Coal Fields Ltd. Through the Chairman & Managing Director, SECL, Seepat Road, Bilaspur (C.G.)
2. General Manager, South Eastern Coal Fields Ltd., Bhatgaon Area, Bhatgaon, Distt. Sarguja (C.G.)
3. Dy. Chief Personnel Manager, South Eastern Coal Fields Ltd., Bhatgaon Area, Bhatgaon, Distt. Surguja (C.G.)
4. Dy. Personnel Manager, South Eastern Coal Fields Ltd., Kalyani Sub-Area, Bhatgaon Area, Bhatgaon, Distt. Surguja (C.G.) ---- Respondents For Petitioner : Mr. Alok Bakshi, Advocate. For Respondents : Dr. N.K. Shukla, Senior Advocate with Smt. Astha Shukla, Advocate.
Hon'ble Shri Justice Sanjay K. Agrawal Order On Board 0 1 /0 2 /201 (1) Instant writ petition has been filed challenging the order dated 08.01.2008 passed by respondent No. 4- Deputy Personnel Manager, Kalyani, Sub Area whereby the respondent No. 4 has directed recovery of Rs.2,77,722/- as penal rent from the petitioner employee.
(2) Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that since no opportunity of hearing was given to the petitioner while passing the order for recovery of 2,77,722/- as penal rent ₹ against him, therefore, he may be permitted to make representation before the respondents authorities against the order dated 08.01.2008 (Annexure P-1).
(3) Learned counsel for the respondents/SECL would submit that if the petitioner makes representation against the order dated 08.01.2008, the respondents/SECL would consider the representation in accordance with law keeping in view the fact that the petitioner has now retired from the services. (4) Be that as it may, the petitioner is directed to make representation to the respondent No.1 and, in turn, the respondent No.1 shall decide the representation expeditiously preferably within a period of two months from the date of receipt of copy of this order in accordance with law keeping in view the fact that the petitioner has already retired from services. (5) With the aforesaid observation, the writ petition stands finally disposed of. However, since the stay order is operating since 20.10.2008, it will continue till the representation is decided. Sd/- (Sanjay K. Agrawal) Judge D/-