Jharkhand High Court
Ganesh Kumar vs Rural Dev Dept on 12 May, 2014
Author: Aparesh Kumar Singh
Bench: Aparesh Kumar Singh
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
W. P. (S) No. 6756 of 2013
...
Ganesh Kumar ... ...Petitioner
-V e r s u s-
The Vinoba Bhave University, Hazaribagh & Ors.... ...Respondents
...
CORAM: - HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE APARESH KUMAR SINGH
...
For the Petitioner : - M/s Sujit Narayan Prasad & Sourabh Shekhar
For the Respondents : -JC to GP-I
....
02/12.05.2014Heard learned counsel for the parties.
This is a case where the petitioner, who has been transferred from the post of Assistant Engineer from the Rural Development Department, Special Division, Medini Nagar, Palamau to Kharkai Canal Division, Raj Nagar district of Seraikella, Kharsawan, has raised a grievance that his Last Pay Certificate is not being issued by the respondent no. 6 on account of non adjustment of advance amount by the Junior Engineer concerned upon execution of work. The petitioner has also impleaded about 15 such Junior Engineers as party respondents in the instant case.
After hearing learned counsel for the petitioner as well as respondent-State, this Court does not consider it proper to enter into the question of facts relating to handing over of vouchers/bills relating to advance by one or other officers of the State like the Junior Engineer in respect of which petitioner is said to have made advance payment of certain Public Works in the department at the place where he was functioning under Special Division, Medini Nagar, Palamau. These matters are to be considered by the Competent Authority under the respondent-department and after thorough scrutiny of the relevant documents relating to execution of work and upon verification of such execution with the vouchers/bills etc. under the prescribed procedure. Though the petitioner has submitted that he has made several efforts on his own by approaching concerned respondent for issuance of his last pay certificate after completion of all formalities, this Court in exercise of writ jurisdiction is not inclined to issue any writ or direction one way or another in favour of the petitioner on such issues involving several question of facts. It is, however, expected that the concerned competent authority of the State and the superior controlling authority should look into the matter and take an appropriate decision in accordance with law so that matters be not brought to the Court. Accordingly, without interfering in the writ petition and without making any observations upon the petitioner's claim, the petitioner is left to pursue his representation before the competent authority of the respondent department, who is expected to act in accordance with law in the matter within a reasonable time.
Accordingly, this writ petition is disposed of with the aforesaid observation.
(Aparesh Kumar Singh, J.) Kamlesh/