Heard Sri D.K. Srivastava, learned counsel for the petitioner.
Notices on behalf of opposite party Nos.1 and 2 have been accepted by Sri Anand Shankar Asthana, Advocate, who has filed his Vakalatnama on their behalf, which is taken on record.
Issue notice to opposite party No.3, by both ways, returnable at an early date.
Let necessary steps be taken within a week. Office to proceed accordingly.
Office is directed to issue necessary Dasti Summons to learned counsel for the petitioner for service upon the opposite party No.3 outside the Court through Dasti Summons.
The submission of learned counsel for the petitioner is that the opposite parties are not releasing the post retiral benefits to the petitioner, who retired on 30.09.2018, after completing the age of superannuation.
Learned counsel for the petitioner has further submitted that the opposite party No.3 preferred a letter dated 30.11.2018 to opposite party No.2 indicating therein that there is some dues shown against the petitioner. As per learned counsel for the petitioner, so far as the dues of Rs.200086=00 is concerned, the issue in question has already been considered by the Competent Authority i.e. the Secretary, State Cane Services Authority and vide order dated 21.02.2012 it has been decided that the allegation against the petitioner regarding the aforesaid dues has not been proved. Such order has been enclosed as Annexure No.6 to the writ petition.
Learned counsel for the petitioner has further submitted that so far as the other dues are concerned, as per order dated 30.11.2018, the petitioner is not entitled for such dues and those dues has wrongly indicated in the order dated 30.11.2018.
Sri Anand Shankar Asthana, learned counsel for the opposite parties has submitted that the letter dated 30.11.2018 was preferred by the opposite party No.3 to the opposite party No.2, therefore, unless the submission of the opposite party No.3 is not heard regarding the aforesaid letter dated 30.11.208, the controversy may not be understood.
List this petition on 14.02.2019 as fresh to enable Sri Anand Shankar Asthana to seek complete instructions in the matter from the opposite party Nos.1 and 2 and if the notice is served upon the opposite party No.3, the specific instructions shall be provided from the opposite party No.3 to the Court.
Learned counsel for the petitioner shall file affidavit of service on or before the next date of listing.
In the meantime, it is provided that necessary exercise be carried out by the opposite parties so that the petitioner, who retired on 30.09.2018, could get something in the name of post retiral benefits.
When the case is next listed, name of Sri Anand Shankar Asthana, Advocate be printed in the cause list, as counsel for the opposite parties.
Order Date :- 24.1.2019 Suresh/ [Rajesh Singh Chauhan,J.]