Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 0, Cited by 0]

Patna High Court - Orders

Prabhat Ranjan Sinha @ Prabhash Ranjan ... vs The Union Of India & Ors. on 13 May, 2011

Author: V.N.Sinha

Bench: V.N.Sinha

                    IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                              MJC No.3270 of 2010
                  PRABHAT RANJAN SINHA @ PRABHASH RANJAN SINHA,
SON OF LATE BAGESHWARI PRASAD, PERMANENT RESIDENT OF SITALPUR
BAREJA, P.S. SITALPUR, DISTRICT- SARAN, AT PRESENT RESIDING AT
304, KRISHNA KUNJ APARTMENT, 8, S.K. NAGAR ROAD, PATNA AND POSTED
AS DEVELOPMENT OFFICER, GRADE-1, NEW INDIA ASSURANCE COMPANY LTD.,
DIVISIONAL OFFICE NO.2, GOVIND BHAWAN, NEW DAK BUNGLOW ROAD,
DISTRICT/TOWN- PATNA :---PETITIONER.
                                       Versus
                          1. THE UNION OF INDIA
                          2. SRI PRADEEP KUMAR, DAS, SON OF NOT
                             KNOWN TO THE PETITIONER CHIEF
                             REGIONAL MANAGER, NEW INDIA ASSURANCE
                             COMPANY LTD. REGIONAL OFFICE,
                             B.S.F.C. BUILDING, FRASER ROAD,
                             PATNA-800001.
                          3. SRI ANUP KUMAR SINHA, SON OF NOT
                             KNOWN TO THE PETITIONER, DIVISIONAL
                             MANAGER, THE NEW INDIA ASSURANCE
                             COMPANY LTD. DIVISIONAL OFFICE NO. 2,
                             GOVIND BHAWAN, NEW DAK BUNGLOW ROAD,
                             PATNA-800001 :---OPPOSITE PARTIES.
                                   -----------
 4.   13.05.2011

. Heard learned counsel for the parties.

2. Counsel for the Insurance Company has filed show-cause on behalf of Opposite Party Nos. 2, 3 annexing the copy of the order dated 13th August, 2010, Annexure-A, whereunder request of the petitioner for not giving retrospective effect to the notification dated 19.06.2008 of the Government of India, Ministry of Finance, Department of Financial Services, Insurance Division, New Delhi has been considered and rejected approving deduction with retrospective effect from 2003-04 onwards. It is submitted on behalf of the petitioner that without making a reference to the notification 2 dated 19.06.2008 which contain explanatory memorandum stating that no Development Officer of the Company is likely to be affected adversely by giving the notification retrospective effect the Company has given retrospective effect to the notification contrary to the explanatory clause.

3. Let the petitioner challenge the order dated 13.08.2010, Annexure-A to the show- cause by filing a writ petition on the ground(s) noted above.

4. The contempt application is, accordingly, disposed of.

(V.N.Sinha,J.) P.K.P.