- (1.) The present petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying therein for issuance of direction upon the respondentauthorities to consider and pay entire service and death-cum- retrial dues of husband of the present petitioner, who is the widow of the deceased employee, including family pension, gratuity, L.C.S.amount with appropriate cost and interest. It is further prayed that respondent-authorities may be directed to consider and pay C.M.P.F. amount with appropriate cost and interest to the petitioner.
(2.) A counter affidavit has been filed on behalf of respondents no.1 to 5 wherein it has been stated in paragraph -6 that so far as the Coal Mines Provident Fund claim amount is concerned, husband of the petitioner during his life time had applied on 17.10.1995 for the Coal Mines Provident Fund refund and on the application of the petitioner the claim was processed and forwarded to the Coal Mines Provident Fund authorities vide letter no. CM/Topa/ CMPF/95/721 dated 1.11.1995, a copy of which has been annexed as annexure A to this affidavit. It is stated in paragraph -8 that Sri. Jaglal Ganjhu i.e. the husband of the petitioner, was dismissed from the services of the respondent no.1 Company on the charge of long unauthorized absence vide order no. PO/Topa/DA/Dismissal/94/653 dated 25/29.8.1994 with effect from 23.8.2004. It is further stated in paragraph -9 that in view of the above fact the petitioner is not entitled to get any amount under Life Cover Scheme (LCS) as the petitioner did not die in harness. It is further stated in paragraph-10 of the counter affidavit that since the husband of the petitioner had not filled up PS II form, as such the pension as claimed by the petitioner could not be processed. In paragraph-11 of the counter affidavit it is stated that so far as gratuity is concerned, the claim of gratuity in respect of Smt. Charki Devi(Petitioner) wife of Late Jaglal Ganjhu has been processed for payment of amount of Rs. 27021/- and same will be paid to the petitioner at an early date.
(3.) The learned counsel appearing for the respondent nos. 6 has referred to and relied upon the counter affidavit filed on behalf of therespondent no.6 in which it has been mentioned in paragraph-8 of the said affidavit that Jaglal Ganjhu, who was the employee of the respondent no.1 Company, had withdrawn his provident fund amount during his life time as the claim was finalized vide P.O.No. 46(95-96) for a sum of Rs. 63185/- and the said amount was sent to the State Bank of India, Topa Colliery, SBI Branch to be credited in saving account no. 4092 vide cheque no. 706929 dated 15.2.1996.;