Ramcharan Sahu v. State Of Chhattisgarh

NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPS No. 3302 of 2019 Ramcharan Sahu S/o Jagarmath Sahu Aged About 66 Years Occupation Retired Teacher, Goverment Middle School Padauli, Block Lundra, District Surguja Chhattisgarh R/o Village And Post Jhingo, Block Rajpur, District Balrampur Ramanujganj Chhattisgarh., District : Balrampur, Chhattisgarh ---- Petitioner

Versus

1. State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Secretary, Department Of School Education New Mantralaya, New Raipur Chhattisgarh., District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh

2. The Sr. Accounts Officer Office Of The Account General, State Of Chhattisgarh, Zero Point, Balodabazar Road, Post Office, Vidhan Sabha, Raipur Chhattisgarh., District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh

3. The District Education Officer District Surguja Chhattisgarh., District : Surguja (Ambikapur), Chhattisgarh

4. The Block Education Officer Lundra, District Surguja Chhattisgarh., District : Surguja (Ambikapur), Chhattisgarh

5. The Principal Goverment Middle School Padauli, Block Lundra, District Surguja Chhattisgarh., District : Surguja (Ambikapur), Chhattisgarh ---- Respondents For Petitioner :

Mr. Dashrath Kushwaha, Advocate For State :

Mr. Jitendra Pali, Dy. AG For Respondent No. 2 :

Mr. Rajkumar Gupta, Advocate.

Hon'ble Shri Justice P. Sam Koshy Order on Board 03/05/2019

1. The prayer made by the petitioner in the present case is for the direction to the respondents to consider and decide the representation of the petitioner which he had made on 06/12/2017 so far as releasing of the GPF amount as well as the amount under GIS is concerned.

2. Counsel for the respondent submits that perhaps it is case where there is negative balance in the GPF account of the petitioner to the tune of Rs. 104064/- and therefore the amount could not be settled. The petitioner however submits that the said order of recovery is bad for the reason that there has been no withdrawals made in the past by the petitioner and if at all if any it is not more than that was already in his credit in the GPF Account.

3. Given the nature of dispute that the petitioner has raised, this Court is of the opinion that ends of justice would meet if GPF account of the petitioner is scrutinised once again by the office of the respondent No. 2 & 3 with the available records that they have so far as the GPF and GIS amount is concerned. Respondent No. 2 & 3 are further directed to call upon the petitioner also to furnish any records that he has in his possession so far as the GPF account and details in respect of deduction or withdrawals if any made is concerned.

4. After granting opportunity of hearing to the petitioner in person, respondent No. 2 & 3 shall pass a fresh order determining whether any amount is lying in the credit of the petitioner payable to the petitioner so far as the GPF and GIS amount is concerned.

5. Let this exercise be concluded within a period of four months from the date of receipt of copy of this order.

Sd/- (P. Sam Koshy) Judge Rohit