Salil Kumar Masih v. Chairman/Managing Director

-1NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR Writ Petition (S) No. 3430 of 2019 Salil Kumar Masih S/o Late Shri B. P. Masih, Aged About 62 Years, R/o Plot No. 12, Street No. 4, Panchsheel Society, Sector-B, Borsi, Durg, District- Durg, Chhattisgarh ---- Petitioner

Versus

1. Chairman/Managing Director, United India Insurance Co. Ltd. 24, Whites Raod, Chennai- 600014

2. General Manager ( Personnel ) United India Insurance Co. Ltd. 24, Whites Road, Chennai-600014

3. Deputy Regional Manager, United India Insurance Co. Ltd. Regional Office, Raipur (Chhattisgarh) 647-A, 648 And 649, 6th Floor, Magneto Office, Magneto, The Mall, Labhandi, Raipur, 492010

4. Chief Regional Manager, United India Insurance Company Ltd. Regional Office, Raipur ( Chhattisgarh), 647-A, 648 And 649, 6th Floor, Magneto Office, Magneto, The Mall, Labhandi, Raipur, 492010 ---- Respondents For Petitioner :

Mr. Ajay Shrivastava, Advocate For State :

Ms. Shriya Mishra, P.L.

Hon'ble Shri Justice P. Sam Koshy Order on Board 07/05/2019

1. The limited relief that the petitioner has sought through the present writ petition is for an appropriate direction to the respondent No.2 for deciding the representation that the petitioner has made so far as releasing of his retiral dues are concerned.

-22. According to the petitioner, his services have been terminated by the respondents vide order dated 05.07.2017, but thereafter no terminal benefits have been given to the petitioner; like leave encashment, gratuity, medical reimbursement and amount under the welfare fund, etc.

3. Given the limited prayer that the petitioner has made, this Court is of the opinion that ends of justice would meet if the respondent No.2 decides the claim of the petitioner in accordance with the service regulations governing the employees/officers of the respondents/Insurance Company. The petitioner would be at liberty to file a fresh representation/objection in respect of his claim to the concerned Officer in the Department.

4. It is made clear that this Court has not expressed any opinion so far as the entitlement of the petitioner is concerned. The respondent No.2 is expected of taking a decision purely in accordance with the merit keeping in view the service regulations governing the field.

5. It is expected that the respondent No.2 shall take a decision at the earliest preferably within a period of 4 months from the date of receipt of the copy of this order

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

Sd/- (P. Sam Koshy) Judge Khatai