2025:JHHC:25822 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI W.P (S). No. 3317 of 2012 ------- Anand Ankur Daradhiyar, son of late Dr. Parijat Kumar Daradhiyar, R/o. House No. 15, Ward No. 12, Hospital Road, Babupara, P.O. & P.S. Godda, District Ranchi. ……….. Petitioner Versus 1. The State of Jharkhand. 2. The Secretary, Health, Medical Education & Family Welfare Department, Govt. of Jharkhand, Ranchi. 3. The Accountant General, Jharkhand, At.+P.O.+P.S. Doranda, Ranchi. 4. The Director-in-Chief, Health Services, Jharkhand, Ranchi. 5. The Civil Surgeon-cum-Chief Medical Officer, Godda, P.O. Godda, P.S. Godda (T), District Godda. 6. The District Provident Fund Officer, Godda, P.O. Godda, P.S. Godda (T), District Godda.. ……….. Respondents ---- CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE DEEPAK ROSHAN For the Petitioner : Ms. Nirupama, Advocate Ms. Binita Sahay, Advocate For the Respondents : Mr. Sudarshan Srivastava, Advocate ---- I.A. No. 11781 of 2025 06/ 28.08.2025 Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the Original Petitioner died on 12.12.2021 and in view of death of the Original Petitioner, his legal heir be substituted in his place. 2. Learned counsel for the respondents does not object to the same. 3. Having regard to the averments made in this application, I.A. No. 11781 of 2025 stands allowed. 4. Learned counsel for the applicant is directed to make suitable corrections in course of the day. W.P.(S). No. 3317 of 2012 5. The instant writ application was preferred by the original petitioner with a prayer for a direction upon the respondents to immediately and forthwith make payment of retiral benefits viz. Provident Fund, Gratuity, Leave Encashment, Arrears of Pension for the period from June, 2008, Arrears of difference of salary and 2025:JHHC:25822 2 dearness allowance after 2nd ACP for the period Sept., 2005 to May, 2008. 6. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the original petitioner has died and his legal heir is not aware with the fact about legal entitlement of the original petitioner; as such, the instant application may be disposed of by giving liberty to the present petitioner who has been substituted in place of original petitioner to approach the concerned respondent(s) along with documents with regard to the prayers made in this writ application. 7. Learned counsel for the respondents does not have any objection. 8. Having regard to the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case, the instant application is hereby disposed of by giving liberty to the present petitioner, who has been substituted in place of the original petitioner to approach the concerned respondent(s) with all relevant documents by filing a detailed representation within a period of eight weeks and if any such representation is preferred before the concerned respondent(s), the same shall be disposed of after verification of records within a further period of twelve weeks. 9. It goes without saying that if at all there is any admitted dues lying in the name of original petitioner, the same shall be paid to the present petitioner. The reasoned order shall also be communicated to the present petitioner. 10. Accordingly, the instant writ application stands disposed of. (Deepak Roshan, J.) Kunal