2025:JHHC:21483 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI W.P.(S) No. 6020 of 2016 Amal Kumar Dutta, son of late Krishna Kinkar Dutta, resident of Barmasiya, near Park, P.S. Dhansar, P.O. Dhanbad, District Dhanbad … … Petitioner Versus 1. M/s. Bharat Coking Coal Limited through its Chairman-cum- Managing Director, Koyla Bhawan, Koyla Nagar, P.O. Koyla Nagar, P.S. Saraidhela, District Dhanbad. 2. Director Personnel (I.R.), M/s. Bharat Coking Coal Ltd., Koyla Bhawan, Koyla Nagar, P.O. Koyla Nagar, P.S. Saraidhela, District Dhanbad. 3. General Manager, Kusunda Area (Area-VI), M/s. Bharat Coking Coal Ltd., P.O. Kusunda, P.S. Kenduadih, District Dhanbad. 4. Finance Manager, Kusunda Area (Area-VI), M/s. Bharat Coking Coal Ltd., P.O. Kusunda, P.S. Kenduadih, District Dhanbad. 5. Commissioner, Coal Mines Provident Fund, Dhanbad, P.O. & P.S. Dhanbad, District Dhanbad. 6. Regional Commissioner, Coal Mines Provident Fund, D – 1, Dhanbad, P.O. & P.S. Dhanbad, District Dhanbad … … Respondents --- CORAM :HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE ANUBHA RAWAT CHOUDHARY --- For the Petitioner : None For the CMPFO : Mr. Prashant Kumar Singh, Advocate : Mr. Karbir, Advocate For the BCCL : Mr. Pratyush, JC to Mr. Anoop Kr. Mehta, Adv. --- 28/01.08.2025 This writ petition has been filed for the following relief: “That through the instant writ application, the petitioner prays for issuance of an appropriate writ (s), order(s), direction(s) or a writ in the nature of mandamus directing and commanding upon the respondents to revise and fix the proper amount of pension of the petitioner in accordance with the Coal Mines Pension Scheme and to pay the difference amount of pension as well as the current revised pension alongwith interest @ 12% upon the differences of pension amount, to the petitioner from the date of his retirement i.e. from 2025:JHHC:21483 2 01.12.2009 under the respondent M/s. Bharat Coking Coalfields Ltd. And / Or For issuance of an appropriate writ(s), order(s), direction (s) as may be deemed fit and proper for doing conscionable justice to the petitioner.” 2. Nobody appears on behalf of the petitioner. 3. On the last day, i.e. on 18.07.2025, it was submitted that the sole petitioner has expired and on the perusal of the learned counsel for the petitioner, the matter was adjourned for two weeks. 4. No petition for substitution has been filed to the present case. 5. The learned counsel for the respondent – BCCL has submitted that all admissible amount has been paid to the petitioner during his lifetime. 6. Considering the fact that the petitioner has already expired and there is no point keeping the matter pending, this writ petition is disposed of. (Anubha Rawat Choudhary, J.) Saurav