Arvind William v. Accountant General ((Accounts And Entitlement)
NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR W.P.S. NO. 4948 OF 2020 • Arvind William, S/o Late John William, aged about 63 years, (Retired Hand Pump Mechanic, Public Health Engineering Department), R/o Happy Home, Ghatapara, Near Oxford School, Pandraroad, District Gaurela-Pendra-Marwahi (CG) ... Petitioner versus 1.
Accountant General (Accounts and Entitlement), O/o the Accountant General, Zero Point, Balodabazar Road, Raipur, District Raipur (CG) 2.
State of Chhattisgarh, through the Secretary, Department of Public Health Engineering, Mantralaya, Mahanadi Bhawan, Nava Raipur, Atal Nagar, Raipur, District Raipur (CG) 3.
The Engineer In Chief, Public Health Engineering, Indrawati Bhawan, Nava Raipur, Atal Nagar, Raipur, District Raipur (CG) 4.
The Superintendent Engineer, Public Health Engineering Department, Bilaspur Division, District Bilaspur (CG) 5.
The Executive Engineer, Public Health Engineering Department, Bilaspur Division, District Bilaspur (CG) ... Respondents For Petitioner :
Mr. Vikash Dubey, Advocate.
For Respondent No.1 :
Mr. Raj Kumar Gupta, Advocate.
For Respondents No. 2 to 5:
Mr. Sudeep Verma, Dy. G.A.
Hon'ble Shri Justice P. Sam Koshy Order on Board /01/2021 1.
The dispute in the present Writ Petition is in respect of the GPF amount payable to the Petitioner on his superannuation. 2.
Learned Counsel for Petitioner submits that the Petitioner was working on the post of Hand Pump Technician under the Respondents and has retired on attaining the age of superannuation on 31.5.2018. On his retirement, his provident fund bank account was reflecting a balance of Rs.3,20,922/- whereas after his retirement the Department has shown his GPF balance as Rs.6,945/-. Learned Counsel further submits that he has instructions to make a submission that there was no withdrawal made by the Petitioner as reflected in the GPF account for the year 1991-92, 1992-93, 1995-96, 2002-03 and 2010-11 and the balance of Rs.6,945/- as reflected by the Respondents is erroneous and needs to be inquired into.
3.
Since the dispute raised is in respect of the amount of GPF that the Petitioner is entitled for, this Court is of the opinion that no fruitful purpose would be served in admitting the present Writ Petition and calling the reply of Respondents, rather it is a case where the Respondents should be directed to look into the grievance and conduct enquiry/verification of the GPF account of the Petitioner maintained by the employer as well as which is maintained by the office of the Accountant General.
4.
Accordingly, the Respondent No.1 as also the Respondents No. 4 & 5 are hereby directed to immediately process the GPF amount of the Petitioner wherein both the records that are available with the department of PHE as also that available with the office of Accountant General shall be tallied and verified. Respondents are also directed to call upon the Petitioner to furnish his passbook so far as his GPF account is concerned to the authorities concerned for necessary cross-verification of the account. Subject to verification, if any amount is payable the same shall be released forthwith without any delay. Let this exercise be concluded within a period of four months from the date of receipt of copy of this order.
5.
In case, if it is found that there was no withdrawal actually made by the Petitioner and there have been some fraudulent withdrawals reflected, the Respondents are directed to immediately conduct an enquiry in this regard and take appropriate remedial steps and also if required disciplinary action against the erring officers.
6.
Writ Petition accordingly stands disposed of with the aforesaid direction/ observation.
Sd/- (P. Sam Koshy) /sharad/ JUDGE