PATNA, India, Aug. 4 -- Patna High Court issued the following judgment on July 15:

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the State.

I.A. No.01 of 2025

2. Counsel for the petitioner submits that during pendency of the writ petition, the petitioner died leaving behind his two sons, namely, Umesh Dubey and Santosh Kr. Dubey. He further submits that Umesh Dubey has sworned an affidavit before the Notary Public that time bound promotion of his father may be given to his younger brother in which he has no objection, and therefore, only younger brother, namely, Santosh Kr. Dubey has filed vakalatnama and requested to make payment to his younger brother.

3. Counsel for the State and Road Transport Corporation are present and submit that for the purpose of substitution, they have no objection for the same and the present I.A. No.01 of 2025 may be allowed.

4. After hearing the parties, this Court is of the opinion that for the purpose of substitution and to conduct the case, the representation of Santosh Kr. Dubey is hereby accepted. But so far as the payment of benefits are concerned, an affidavit before Notary Public is not sufficient, but only for the purpose of substitution, the present I.A. No.01 of 2025 is hereby allowed.

5. Office is directed to substitute the name of the petitioner by his son, namely, Santosh Kr. Dubey who filed vakalatnama, in the writ petition as well as in the cause title in course of the day.

Re:- C.W.J.C. No.10968 of 2016 6. Counsel for the petitioner submits that the present writ application has been filed by the father of the petitioner to grant first and second time bound promotion and further to give all legal consequential benefits arising out of the said promotion and to pay other dues and salary.

7. Counsel further submits that the demand of GPF has been made in the writ petition, but the said GPF amount has been paid to him and therefore, he is not inclined to demand GPF amount.

8. Counsel for the Road Transport Corporation submits that there is clear cut stand taken by the Corporation that under the severe financial crunch, the Corporation is at the verge of closing at one point of time, but by the order of Hon'ble Supreme Court of India, revival took place. He further submits that when the State Government provides adequate fund for clearing the liability of retiral dues and salary of the employee of the Corporation then only, money would be paid. But he further submits that the petitioner, in the meantime, may file a representation so that his representation may be kept pending before the Corporation.

9. In the light of the submissions made by the Corporation, it transpires to this Court that due to financial crunch, Corporation is not in a position to pay the dues and hence, the present writ petition is hereby disposed off directing the petitioner to file his representation before the Bihar State Road Transport Corporation and the Corporation shall keep pending his representation till the State Government shall not provide finance.

10. With the aforesaid observations, the present writ application stands disposed off.

Disclaimer: Curated by HT Syndication.