Jharkhand High Court
Salmon Dung Dung vs State Of Jharkhand And Ors on 3 August, 2015
Author: Aparesh Kumar Singh
Bench: Aparesh Kumar Singh
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
W.P.(S) No. 2571 of 2015
---
Salmon Dung Dung --- --- ---- Petitioner
Versus
1. The State of Jharkhand
2. Director, Provident Fund, Jharkhand
3. District Provident Fund Officer, Simdega
4. Deputy Commissioner, Simdega
5. District Animal Husbandry Officer, Simdega --- --- --- Respondents
---
CORAM: The Hon'ble Mr. Justice Aparesh Kumar Singh
For the Petitioner: Mr. Pankaj Kumar, Advocate
For the Resp-State: Mr. Sumir Prasad, SC-I
---
02/ 03.08.2015Heard counsel for the parties.
2. The writ petition though is lacking in necessary material particulars and details, but it is made out from the submission of the petitioner's counsel and the skeletal pleadings on record that the petitioner has retired as a Peon on 31.10.1994 from the Animal Husbandry Office at Thethaitangar which is now falling within the district of Simdega, earlier Gumla. He was appointed as a Peon on 08.02.1960 and his only grievance is that his GPF remains unpaid, though pension, etc. are being paid to him. The Sub Divisional Animal Husbandry Officer, Simdega before whom he represented vide Anexure-2 after twenty years of his retirement on 31.10.2014, is not even a party. Such sketchy pleadings has more become a rule than exception.
3. Counsel for the respondent State also submits that there are no material details to which contention of the petitioner can be responded after he has superannuated in 1994 itself and approached this Court in 2015 June for the instant relief.
4. Taking a considerate view of the aforesaid issue, it is felt that if GPF claim of a person retired from Class-IV post of Peon is not paid, it was the duty of the learned counsel appearing on his behalf to give all necessary details in the writ petition. The best course therefore appears to be that he should approach the Respondent No. 5 - District Animal Husbandry Officer, Simdega and Respondent No. 3 - District Provident Fund Officer, Simdega for redressal of the aforesaid 2. grievances of course containing all necessary material details and supporting documents.
Needless to say, if the claim of the petitioner is found to be genuine and admissible, respondent concerned would take a decision on that within a reasonable time and admissible GPF with statutory interest be released thereafter.
5. Writ petition stands disposed of with the aforesaid observations and directions.
(Aparesh Kumar Singh, J) Ranjeet/