MOSST CHUKU DEVI Vs. STATE OF JHARKHAND

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard.

(2.) Petitioner is claiming retiral benefits of her husband late- Ganesh Mistri @ Lohar. Mr. Srivastava, appearing for the A.G., submitted that when the letter no. 44 dated 17.1.2005 was sent by the D.S.E., Simdega to the Accountant General reply was sent raising certain objections but thereafter the required documents have not been resubmitted with the Accountant General in spite of reminder sent on 3.11.2009.

(3.) Counsel for the State submitted that in absence of instruction and counter affidavit, she is not in a position to accept or controvert the statements made in the writ petition. However, the matter can be looked into.