Judgment Counsel for the petitioner pointed out to the order dated 14.7.2009 which reads as under:-- " The respondents are represented by counsel. They will compute and calculate the amount of post retirement dues under each head separately which are payable till date and file the computed calculation along with counter affidavit within a month. The admitted amount so calculated will be paid to the petitioner within the next one month. I am unable to appreciate the contention of the respondents that they are in a financial crises and, therefore, they will make payment of the post retirement dues as and when money is available; which means that some indefinite date in future, especially because amounts like provident fund which are basically the employees' money cannot be misappropriated by the respondents. List this case after two months." It is submitted that the said order has not been complied with. However, Counsel for the Mineral Area Development Authority (for short "the MADA") submitted that this writ petition may be disposed of with direction to respondent no. 2 to look into the matter and do the needful. In the circumstances, the petitioner is directed to make a fresh representation before respondent no. 2 raising his claims in detail with necessary documents, if any. If it is found that any claim/part of it is legally tenable/payable, the respondent no. 2 will issue necessary orders in that regard. If, however, any claim/part of it is found not tenable/payable, the reasons thereof should be communicated to the petitioner. This exercise should be completed within six weeks from the date of receipt of such representation. It is made clear that this Court has not gone into the merits of the case of the parties. With these observations and directions, this writ petition is disposed of. However, no costs.