IN THE HON’BLE HIGH COURT OF CHHA'ITISGARH RESPONDE W ATBILASPUR w.P.(S)No. 5% /2o1o §EE¥E§LE $E$§CH s‘mt. Sudha Verma Wd/o. Late Ambika Prasad Verma, aged about- 6S years, R/o. Post & Tahsil Bagicha, District-Jashpur' (C.G.) VERSUS W PETITIONER NTS l. State of Chhattisgarh through- Secretary, Schooli Education Department, D.K.S. Bhawan, Ravipur (C?G.) 2. The Accountant Geheral (A.G.), I Raipur, Chhattisgarh 3. The-Accountant General (A.G.), (Lekha /Haqdari), Second, M.P., ,Gwalior.474002, (M.P. 4. District Education Officer, Jashpur, District- Jashpur (C.G.) 5. Block Education Officer, Block Bagicha, District- Jashpur (C.G.) / RIT PETITION UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA ) (Hon Mr Justice Prltmker Dlwaker) Writ Petition (S) No. 929 of 2010 PETITIONEVR‘ ’ Smt. Sudha Verma z VERSUS RESPONDENTS State of Chha‘ttisgarh and others Shri K.N. Nande counsel for the petitioner. Shri Kishore Bhaduri Additional AG for respondents 1, 4 & 5. Shri Ragvendra Pradhan counsel for respondent No.2 and 3. Shri S.S. Sarojkar, Senior Accounts Officer in the ofnce of Accountant General, Raipur, Chhattisgarh, éhri Vivek Dalela, Assistant Commissioner, Tribal Development, Jashpur, Shri D.S. Patel, Project Administrator, Tribal Development, Jashpur- and Shri A.R. Nikunj, Block Education Officer,'Bagicha‘, District Jashpur, are present before this Court. WRIT PETITION UNDER ARTICLES 226 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA O R D E R (25.11.2010) Grievance of the petitioner in this petition is that her husband, Iate rAmbika Prasad Verma employed as teacher in Tribal Department retired on 30.6.1996 from the post of Head Master. Her further case is that full GPF amount of her husband which comes to Rs 2 62 000 has not been paid either to her or to her husband and till date she has been paid only Rs 63 978 2. Counsel for the petitioner submits that as many as 09 accounts were I T opened in the name of Iate Ambika Prasad Verma and the respondents have failed to calculate the GPF amount of all the accounts numbers and? have given a very meager amount of Rs. 63,978 only to the petitioner. 3. While hearing this petition, on 30.9.2010 learned Additional Advocate General had informed this Court that considering the nature of dispute the Government has decided to conduct a detailed enquiry and to bring out the correct facts and therefore, the State counsel was granted time to submit the enquiry report. Pursuant to the order passed by this: Court, the State Government has appointed the Project Administrator, ntegrated Tribal Development Project to conduct an enquiry and copy of' the said enquiry report has been filed along with the applicatiOn dated 19.11.2010. As per this enquiry report certain entries were made in the pass book of late Ambika Prasad Verma much after his death and the said entry appears to be incorrect. Enquiry report further reveals that the entry is alleged to have been made by Amrit Ram Nikunj, Block Education Officer, Bagicha but during enquiry he has denied to have made the said ntry. As per the enquiry report, the petitioner is entitled for Rs.'63,978 only which has already been paid to late Ambika Prasad Verma on’ 21.1 1 .2007 and as on date the petitioner is not entitled for any amount. 4 . Counsel for respondents 2 and 3 also submits that the entire payment had already made to the husband of the petitioner and nothing remains to be paid to'the petitioner. He referred to various entries madein the pass book of late Ambika Prasad Verma and according to him also the petitioner is not entitled for any other amount. 5. Counsel for the petitioner seriously disputes the documents as filed by the respondents and submits that he is in possession of the original pass book No. ED/NMP/5380 and from the said pass book it is apparent that late Ambika Prasad Verma was entitled to Rs. 2,62,000. He submits that late Ambika Prasad Verma had withdrawn only Rs. 15,000 during his entire service career whereas according to the respondents the withdrawal made by him was to the tune of Rs. 65, 608. 6. From the documents tiled by the parties it is apparent that the > disputed question of fact is involved in the case and therefore at this stage the same cannot be adjudicated upon. l 7. Learned Additional Advocate General submits that in the interest of justice the matter may be referred to the High Power Committee constituted for settlement of retiral dues and in the said committee the r petitionergas well as the respondents may be permitted to lead their‘ evidence. Proposal made by the Additional Advocate General is accepted . by the counsel for the petitioner which in fact appears to be veryh y I reasonable. I e _.3 “v 8. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case particularly the isputed facts of the case involved herein, Iet the petitioner make a representation to the said Committee or to make a request to the office of the Advocate Generai along with the copy of the writ petition for fonNarding the same to the said committee. Let this be done within a period of 15 days from the date of receipt of this order. On this being done, the Committee shall issue notice to the petitioner and officers concerned within a further period of 15 days. Looking to the seriousness of the dispute involved in the case, the Committee is directed toallow the parties to lead their evidence and give fully opportunity to present their case and after due scrutiny of the facts it shall passthe order in an objective manner within a period of five months therefrom. If the grievance of the petitioner still survives, the petitioner would be at liberty to approach this Court again. Needless to say that the respondents/authorities shall offer due co-operation during the proceedings before the committee and will not seek unnecessary t adjournment. 9. With the observations and directions made above, the petition is disposed of. / Certified copy by tomorrow. / /{ / Sm- Prttinker Diwaker d