MITHILESH KUMAR Vs. S. MANOHARAN
LAWS(JHAR)-2003-6-32
HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND
Decided on June 18,2003

MITHILESH KUMAR Appellant
VERSUS
S. MANOHARAN Respondents

JUDGEMENT

S.J.MUKHOPADHAYA,J. - (1.) MR . S.N. Pandey, Assistant Manager (Personnel), H.S.C.L., Bokaro is present in the Court. He handed over the following cheques issued in the name of the writ petitioners either personally or through their Counsel, which are mentioned herein below: NameAmount Paid Cheque No. and Dateremarks Rupees (1)Satrughan Sharma :1,20,284.00 520067 -26 -5 -2003 4,480.96 566903 -4 -6 -2003 Handed over to Mr. Rajiv Ranjan, Counsel for onward transmission to writ petitioner.(2)Maj. O.K. Mishra 68,804.00 520068 -26 -5 -2003 6,732,00 566904 -4 -6 -2003 Handed overto Mr. S.K. Sinha, Counsel for onward transmission to writ petitioner.(3)R.K. Jha1,17,114.00 520069 -26 -5 -2003 12,681.50 566905 -4 -6 -2003 Handed over to Mr. Rajiv Ranjan, Counsel for onward transmission to writ petitioner.(4)K.P. Singh :44,214.00 520070 -26 -5 -2003 16,756.26 566906 -4 -6 -2003 Handed over to Mr. Rajiv Ranjan, Counsel for onward transmission to writ petitioner. (5)Mithilesh Kumar :1,20,300.00 520071 -26 -5 -2003 8,284.00 566829 -13 -5 -2003 4,224.26 566907 -4 -6 -2003 Handed over to Mr. Mithilesh Kumar, in presence of his Counsel Mr. Rajiv Ranjan.(6)D. Sanyal :71,298.00 520072 -26 -5 -2003 17,020.00 566908 -4 -6 -2003 Handed over to Mr. D. Sanyal, in presence of his Counsel Mr. Dhananjay Kr. Dubey.(7)P.R.Yadav:20,502.00 520073 -26 -5 -2003 6,836.18 566909 -4 -6 -2003 Handed over to Mr. Rajiv Ranjan, Counsel for onward transmission to writ petitioner.(8)JS.K. Singh:92,743.00 520074 -26 -5 -2003 Handed over to Mr. S.K. Singh in presence of his Counsel Mr. Anil Choudhary(9)Dilip Yadav :9,31,499.09 242363 -11 -3 -2003 Handed over to Mr. Sidheshwar Prasad Advocate for onward transmission to writ petitioner.
(2.) THE statement of admitted dues has been handed over by the Counsel for the H.S.C.L., Bokaro to the respective Counsel for the writ petitioners. Mr. Rajiv Ranjan one of the Counsel for the writ petitioners submitted that there is some discrepancy between the statement of admitted dues, which was earlier handed over to the writ petitioners and the other served here today before the Court.
(3.) MR . Mazumdar, the Counsel for the H.S.C.L. submitted that in the earlier statement of admitted dues, the arrears of the salary was shown on the basis of revised scale, but in the present statement of admitted dues, the arrears of salary has been shown in the pre -revised scale of pay, It is stated that the difference of arrears on revision of pay will be paid to the writ petitioners, as and when, the fund is allotted by the Government of India.;


Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.