← Library
High Court Of ChhattisgarhWPS/3188/2016disposed off

Dhananjay Kumar v. South Eastern Coalfields Limited

2016-12-15Hon'Ble Shri Justice P. Sam Koshy2 pages

-1NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WRIT PETITION (S) NO. 3188 OF 2016 Dhananjay Kumar, S/o Late Chandeshwar Prasad, aged about 35 years, working as Dumper Operator, Kusumunda Project, South Eastern Coalfields Colliery, Kusumunda, District Korba (C.G.) ... Petitioner

Versus

1.

South Eastern Coalfields Limited, through the Managing Director, Headquarter, Seepat Road, Sarkanda, Bilaspur, District Bilaspur (C.G.) 2.

The Manager (Personnel), Kusumunda Project, South Eastern Coalfields Colliery, Kusmunda, District Korba (C.G.) 3.

The Chief Medical Services, South Eastern Coalfields Limited, Seepat Road, Bilaspur (C.G.) 4.

The Deputy Manager (P)/APM, South Eastern Coalfields Limited, Kusumunda Area, District Korba (C.G.) ... Respondents For Petitioner :

Mr. S.A. Ansari, Advocate.

For Respondent-State :

Mr. V.R. Tiwari, Advocate.

Hon'ble Shri Justice P. Sam Koshy Order on Board 15/12/2016 1.

The present petition has been filed by the Petitioner claiming for a direction to the Respondents to forthwith release the reimbursement in respect of the travelling allowance and medical allowance of the Petitioner for the treatment of his minor son at Medanta Hospital, Gudgaon. 2.

Without entering into the merits of the case, this Court feels it proper that the matter may be referred to the General Manager/Chief General Manager of the area where the Petitioner is working i.e., Kusumunda Area, who in turn shall take a decision in the matter. 3.

Accordingly, it is directed that the General Manager/Chief General Manager of the Kusumunda Area shall look into the matter for the release of the allowances as claimed for by the Petitioner. It is further directed that the Respondents shall take a decision in this regard preferably within a

-2period of 60 days from today. It is expected that the Respondents shall objectively pass an order taking into consideration the rules governing the field.

4.

It is made clear that this Court has not expressed its opinion on the entitlement of the claim of the Petitioner.

5.

With the aforesaid directions, the writ petition stands disposed of. Sd/- (P. Sam Koshy) /sharad/ Judge