Amulya Krishna Thakur v. Chhattisgarh State Power Distribution Company Ltd.

-1NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPS No. 2121 of 2019 Amulya Krishna Thakur S/o Late Sukumar Krishna Thakur Aged About 59 Years R/o Qtr No. 777, Near Shiv Mandir, Subhash Nagar, Police Station City Kotwali, Durg District Durg Chhattisgarh. ---- Petitioner

Versus

1. Chhattisgarh State Power Distribution Company Ltd. Through Manging Director, Head Office, Daganiya, Raipur Chhattisgarh.

2. Executive Director (Human Resource) Chhattisgarh State Power Distribution Company Ltd, Head Office Daganiya, Raipur Chhattisgarh.

3. Regional Accountant Officer Chhattisgarh State Power Distribution Company Ltd., Namnakala, Ambikapur, District Surguja Chhattisgarh.

4. Managing Director Chhattisgarh State Power Holding Company Ltd. Head Office, Daganiya, Raipur Chhattisgarh.

---Respondents For Petitioner :

Mr. N. Naha Roy, Advocate Hon'ble Shri Justice P. Sam Koshy Order on Board 26/03/2019

1. The grievance of the petitioner is that the petitioner was working in the Bastar region during the period 2009 to 2018 and while he was posted at Bastar, he was paid Bastar allowance, which was the allowance paid to all those employees, who were posted at Bastar region.

2. The grievance of the petitioner now is that the petitioner on two occasions were paid the allowances for having worked in the Bastar region and on both the occasions, the same has been deducted from the next salary that was paid.

-23. Counsel for the petitioner submits that firstly the petitioner is entitled for Bastar allowance for the entire period that he has worked in Bastar region and secondly the payment made to the petitioner could not have been recovered by the Department.

4. Given the said facts and circumstances, let the petitioner make a detailed representation to the respondent No.1 in this regard supported with all relevant records, documents and circulars applicable and also payslips showing the deductions made. Subject to the petitioner's making a detailed representation within a period of 4 weeks from today, the respondent No.1 in turn shall decided the same on its merit keeping in view the rules, regulations and the circulars governing the field.

5. It is expected that the respondent No.1 shall decide the same within a further period of 90 days from the date of receipt of the representation to be made by the petitioner.

6. With the aforesaid observations, the present writ petition stands disposed off.

Sd/- (P. Sam Koshy) Judge Ved