1 2026:CGHC:2601 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPS No. 1224 of 2023 1 - Jayant Kujur S/o Late Simon Kujur Aged About 24 Years R/o Pathalgaon, Tehsil And Thana Pathalgaon, District Jashpur (C.G.). ... Petitioner(s) versus 1 - Chairman, Chhattisgarh Rajya Gramin Bank Head Office, Sunder Nagar, Raipur, District Raipur (C.G.). 2 - Regional Manager Chhattisgarh Rajya Gramin Bank, Regional Office, Near Shyam Petrol Pump, 3rd Floor One India Family Mart, Raigarh, District Raigarh (C.G.). 3 - Branch Manager Chhattisgarh Rajya Gramin Bank, Branch - Kapu, District Raigarh (C.G.) ... Respondent(s) For Petitioner(s) : Ms. Vidhi Matlani, Advocate on behalf of Mr. Sanjay Agrawal, Advocate. For Respondent(s) : Mr. Raj Shengale, Advocate on behalf of Mr. N. Naha Roy, Advocate. RAGHVENDRA JAT Digitally signed by RAGHVENDRA JAT 2 Hon’ble Mr. Justice Amitendra Kishore Prasad Order on Board 15/01/2026 1. By way of this writ petition, the petitioner has prayed for following reliefs:- “10.1 The Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to call for the entire record pertaining to the case of the petitioners. 10.2 The Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to direct the respondent authorities to allow the petitioner to withdraw his 1/4th share of amount of Rs 448013/- from the account of deceased father. 10.3 Any other relief, which this Hon'ble Court may deems fit and proper may also be awarded to the petitioners including the cost of the petition.” 2. Brief facts of the case, is that, the father of the petitioner was working as a Manager in the Chhattisgarh Rajya Gramin Bank at its Kapu Branch, District Raigarh, and died on 15.04.2005 while in active service, leaving behind his widow and children including the petitioner. It is submitted that during his long tenure he served the department honestly, diligently, and to the complete satisfaction of his superiors and colleagues, but unfortunately met with a sudden and untimely death, leaving a sum of Rs. 4,48,013/- standing to his credit. Thereafter, the petitioner approached the learned Civil Court by filing an application for grant of a succession certificate, which was allowed vide order dated 03.01.2018, wherein the 3 Court observed that there were four legal heirs of the deceased, namely the petitioner, his wife, his second son Ashutosh Kujur, and his daughter Aakansha Kujur, and accordingly directed that the amount lying in the bank account be divided into four equal shares. Pursuant thereto, the petitioner made several representations before the respondent Bank for withdrawal of the amount, however, the respondent, vide letter dated 23.03.2021, informed the petitioner that only Rs. 2,47,889/- towards gratuity and Rs. 2,00,124/- towards leave encashment, totaling Rs. 4,48,013/-, were available in the account of the deceased, and on that basis took a stand that only one-fourth of the said amount could be disbursed and that the order of the Civil Court could not be fully complied with. It is further submitted that the respondent Bank has never disputed that the petitioner is one of the legal heirs of the deceased and is therefore entitled to withdraw his lawful share, and that there is no earning member in the family, as a result of which the petitioner and his mother are facing severe financial hardship. Hence, it is most respectfully submitted that since the petitioner’s father, Simon Kujur, died during the course of his service, the petitioner has a legal and rightful claim to withdraw his due share from the amount lying in the account of his deceased father. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner’s father, late Simon Kujur, who was serving as a Branch Manager with the Chhattisgarh Rajya Gramin Bank at its Kapu Branch, 4 District Raigarh (C.G.), passed away on 15.04.2005, and despite his demise, the lawful terminal and other admissible dues payable to him have not been released by the concerned bank till date. It is contended that a sum of Rs. 4,48,013/-, representing the petitioner’s one-fourth share in the said dues, is still lying unpaid and pending with the respondent bank, which ought to have been disbursed to the deceased employee during his lifetime but could not be so released owing to his untimely death, therefore, a direction is sought from this Hon’ble Court to the concerned bank authorities to forthwith release and disburse the aforesaid amount in favour of the petitioner in accordance with law. 4. On the other hand, learned counsel for the respondents submits that the petitioner had availed a loan of Rs. 3,00,000/- on 11.04.2005 and that, even after adjusting and deducting the entire service dues payable in respect of the deceased employee, the said loan amount remains outstanding along with accrued interest, with the principal sum of Rs. 3,00,000/- still unpaid, in view of the subsisting liability and in accordance with the applicable rules and banking norms, the respondents are justified in withholding the release of the service dues claimed by the petitioner in respect of his late father. 5. At this stage, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that neither in the alleged notice nor through any other communication was any information furnished to the petitioner or the other legal heirs of late Simon Kujur regarding the existence of any 5 outstanding amount payable to the bank, and that it is only after the filing of the present petition that the bank has, for the first time, come forward with the contention that certain dues are outstanding against the petitioner’s deceased father. It is further contended that a succession certificate had already been duly obtained by the petitioner through his mother at a time when the petitioner was a minor, and upon attaining majority, the petitioner has lawfully staked his claim for the release of the service benefits payable to his late father, which, according to him, are being withheld without any prior intimation or lawful justification. 6. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the material available on record. 7. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, and taking note of the fact that the concerned bank had not duly informed the petitioner about any alleged outstanding dues, it is hereby directed that the concerned bank shall furnish to the petitioner complete particulars of the loan stated to have been availed by late Simon Kujur, along with all relevant documents and detailed statements in support thereof. In the event the petitioner is aggrieved by or disputes the correctness or legality of the documents so supplied, he shall be at liberty to submit an appropriate representation before the competent authority. Upon receipt of such representation, the concerned authority shall consider and decide the same strictly in accordance with law, after 6 due application of mind, within a period of 45 days from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. 8. With this observation and direction, the writ petition is disposed of. Sd/- (Amitendra Kishore Prasad) Judge Raghu Jat