WPC/6483/2016 of Arun Kumar Singh Vs Jharkhand State Housing Board And Ors on 16 December 2016

Facts

1. Jharkhand State Housing Board, Hazaribagh

2. The Executive Engineer, Jharkhand State Housing Board, Hazaribagh

3. The Secretary, Jharkhand State Housing Board, Ranchi …...…Respondents.

------

CORAM:HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE DR. S. N. PATHAK

-----------

For Petitioner For Respondents

:Mr. Binod Kumar Dubey, Advocate :Dr. Ashok Kumar Singh, Advocate 02/ 16.12.2016Heard learned counsel for the parties.

In the instant writ application, the petitioner has prayed for quashing of the order dated 09.11.2015, issued by the respondent No. 3, by which the respondent Authorities have demanded Registered Deed of Adoption for deciding the claim of compassionate appointment of the petitioner. Further prayer is for appointment on compassionate ground also for payment of the death-cum-retiral benefits.

From the factual matrix, it came to the notice of this Court that the petitioner's father was working as Plumber Assistant and he died on 15.12.2010 in harness leaving behind his only adopted son i.e. the petitioner. After his death, the Executive Engineer (respondent No. 2) paid Rs.3000/- to the petitioner vide order dated 15.12.2010 for the funeral expenses of his father.

Learned counsel for the petitioner, Mr. Binod Kumar Dubey, submits that the petitioner's father Baban Singh made an application before the Executive Engineer, Housing Board Division, Hazaribagh, in which intimation was given that after his death, the petitioner will be entitled to get the entire benefit and he is only legal heir and representative/ successor on his behalf. Petitioner also submits that the father petitioner had already submitted Deed of Adoption of 2002, which was received in the Office of Housing Board on 08.05.2010. It is also submitted by the petitioner that though the death occurred on 15.12.2010, only the amount of PF has been paid to him and the remaining amount i.e. gratuity, unused leave, insurance and other consequential benefits in the shape of ACP has not been paid till date.

Dr. Ashok Kumar Singh appears on behalf of the Housing Board. Dr. Singh very fairly submits that the writ petition is premature as till date, the respondents have not taken any decision in want of the documents, which were asked by the respondent-Department but which have not been furnished by the petitioner till date.

Having heard the learned counsel for the parties and going through the rival submissions, this Court is of the view that the petitioner should submit the entire documents, which are in his possession to the respondent-Housing Board and the respondent, after receipt of the same, will take a decision regarding the appointment on compassionate ground and also for making payment in the head of death-cum-retiral benefits, i.e. gratuity, unused leave, insurance and other consequential benefits in the shape of ACP, within a period of three months.

It is needless to say that if the decision is taken in favour of the petitioner based on the documents furnished by him, the respondent-Housing Board will consider the case of compassionate appointment and issue letter of appointment within a further period of another two months and also for making payment of the retiral benefits.

If any decision is taken in adverse, the same should also be communicated to the petitioner within a period of one month and it will be open for the petitioner to challenge the decision in the court of law.

As a cumulative effect of the aforesaid facts, observations, rules and guidelines, the writ petition is disposed of.

(Dr. S.N. Pathak, J.)