High Court Of ChhattisgarhWPS/753/2017disposed off

C. N. Kamlasanan v. Hindustan Steel Works Construction Limited

2017-02-14Hon'Ble Shri Justice Sanjay K. Agrawal2 pages

AFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR Writ Petition (S) No.753 of 2017 C.N. Kamlasanan, S/o late Shri N. Narayanan, aged about 67 years, R/o Parijatham, Anjilitham, P.O. Kaviyoor, Thiruvalla, District Pathanamthitta Kerala.

---- Petitioner

Versus

1. Hindustan Steel Works Construction Limited Through Its Chairman Cum Managing Director, 5/1, Commercial Road, Hastings, Kolkata (West Bengal)

2. Sr. Executive (Personnel), Hindustan Steel Works Construction Limited, Nirman Bhawan, Bhilai, District Durg, (Chhattisgarh) ---- Respondents -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- For Petitioner : Mr. P.R. Patankar, Advocate. For Respondents : Mr. N. Naha Roy, Advocate --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Hon'ble Shri Justice Sanjay K. Agrawal Order on Board 14/02/2017

1. Learned counsel appearing for the parties would submit that the issue raised in this petition is squarely covered by the decision of this Court in WPS No.904 of 2002 (R.S. Vishwakarma Vs. Hindustan Steel Works Construction Ltd & Other), decided on 09.11.2016, in which this Court has held as under:- "5. It is not disputed by Shri Deshmukh that the SLP preferred against the order passed by the Division Bench of this Court has been dismissed by the Supreme Court.

6. In view of the orders passed by this Court in WP No.2 of 2001 and WA No.185 of 2007 and other connected writ appeals, the present writ petition is disposed of with a direction that the petitioner shall file a fresh representation before the HSCL claiming all admissible dues including the amount withheld within a period of one month from today. The respondent HSCL shall, thereafter, decide the representation of the petitioner by a speaking order, in an objective manner, and shall pay the entire admissible dues to the petitioner within a further period of two months from the date of submission of representation by the petitioner.

7. It is made clear that if the petitioner feels dissatisfied by rejection of any of his claim he would be at liberty to move afresh before this Court."

2. In view of above, the writ petition is disposed of in terms of paragraphs 5, 6 & 7 of the order passed in R.S. Vishwakarma (supra). No order as to costs(s).

Sd/- (Sanjay K. Agrawal) Judge L/-