Over 2 lakh Indian cases. Search powered by Google!

Case Details

BRAHMANEY DEV MISHRA versus REGISTRAR, CO

High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Case Law Search

Indian Supreme Court Cases / Judgements / Legislation

Judgement


Brahmaney Dev Mishra v. Registrar, Co-Oper. Societeis U.P. And Others - WRIT - A No. 51015 of 2006 [2006] RD-AH 16016 (14 September 2006)

 

This is an UNCERTIFIED copy for information/reference. For authentic copy please refer to certified copy only. In case of any mistake, please bring it to the notice of Joint Registrar(Copying).

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF ALLAHABAD

Hon'ble Amitava Lala, J.

Hon'ble V.C. Misra, J.

Sri K.N. Misra, learned Counsel appeared on behalf of respondents.

The cause of the writ petitioner is that he has not received his provident fund, gratuity, leave encashment amount, etc., which are to be given after his retirement on 30th September, 2004. It appears from annexure-6 to the writ petition that some of the amount, which according to the authority, were given to fictitious persons by the petitioner during his tenure so he was entrusted for the purpose of making recovery of the amount in connection thereof and to take necessary action. Learned Counsel appearing for the respondents supported the cause. However, according to us, the authority concerned can take whatever steps either civil or criminal as against the petitioner, but can not withhold the retiral benefit on the ground that money was disbursed to fictitious persons during his tenure and he can be entrusted to discharge his duty after his retirement for the purpose of recovery of the same. Hence, we dispose of the writ petition with a direction upon the authority concerned to release the retiral benefits of the petitioner but not beyond the period of three months from the date of communication of this order. If the pension is to be paid month by month, it will be paid accordingly from the date of communication of this order. However, passing of this order will not put any embargo upon the respondent authorities to take recourse of law in recovering the amount allegedly given by the petitioner to any fictitious person. The writ petition is, thus, disposed of.

No order is passed as to costs.          

Dt./-14.09.2006.

SKT/-51015-06.


Copyright

Reproduced in accordance with s52(q) of the Copyright Act 1957 (India) from judis.nic.in, indiacode.nic.in and other Indian High Court Websites

Advertisement

dwi Attorney | dui attorney | dwi | dui | austin attorney | san diego attorney | houston attorney | california attorney | washington attorney | minnesota attorney | dallas attorney | alaska attorney | los angeles attorney | dwi | dui | colorado attorney | new york attorney | new jersey attorney | san francisco attorney | seattle attorney | florida attorney | attorney | london lawyer | lawyer michigan | law firm |

Tip:
Double Click on any word for its dictionary meaning or to get reference material on it.