JUDGMENT AND ORDER : Heard Mr. S.K. Talukdar, the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner. The Assam Khadi & Village Industries Board (hereinafter referred to as the “Khadi Board”) and their officers (respondent Nos.2–5) are represented by Mr. J.K. Parajuli, the learned standing counsel. The respondent No.1 is represented by Ms. M. Bhattacharjee, the learned Govt. advocate. 2. The petitioner is the widow of Ikram Rasul, who died on 21.01.2004 while serving as an UDA of the Khadi Board. She applied for the CPF and gratuity dues on account of the deceased employee and is aggrieved by the two office orders dated 23.03.2009 (Annexures-1 and 2), whereunder, deduction under the CPF head and gratuity have been made, in disbursing payment by the Khadi Board. 3.1 The learned counsel Mr. S.K. Talukdar refers to the first office order dated 23.03.2009 (page-11) of the CEO of the Khadi Board to project that although the employee’s contribution of the CPF was equal to the Board’s share (Rs.2,03,548/-), but surprisingly, while disbursing payment, Rs.1,54,240/- was deducted from the employee’s share, without disclosing the reason for such deduction from the payable dues of the deceased employee. 3.2 Similarly, on account of gratuity, Rs.53,226/- was deducted under the 2nd office order dated 23.03.2009 (page-12) for certain alleged adjustment, by the Khadi Board. 3.3 The petitioner contends that deduction from the gratuity and the CPF heads, is wholly unauthorised as the impugned office orders do not disclose the reason for such deduction. 4.1 On behalf of the respondents, Mr. J.K. Parajuli, the learned standing counsel refers to the counter affidavit filed by the CEO of the Khadi Board to contend that the petitioner’s husband (Ikram Rasul) availed loans and advances and also withdrew a portion of his CPF and that is why, the necessary deduction was made during disbursal of the CPF dues, to the widow of the employee. 4.2 In so far as the deduction of Rs.53,226/- from the payable gratuity, Mr. Parajuli has recently received written instruction to the effect that this withheld sum has since been paid to the petitioner, vide cheque No.069813 drawn on 19.04.2017, on the Board’s account in the SBI. 5. The above submission reflects that the entire dues under gratuity head, on account of the employee, have now been cleared. Parajuli has recently received written instruction to the effect that this withheld sum has since been paid to the petitioner, vide cheque No.069813 drawn on 19.04.2017, on the Board’s account in the SBI. 5. The above submission reflects that the entire dues under gratuity head, on account of the employee, have now been cleared. But in so far as deduction of the CPF contribution is concerned, only cryptic averments have been made in paragraph 6 of the counter affidavit, to the effect that the petitioner’s husband availed loan and withdrew from his CPF account. What is conspicuous in the averment is that the Board has failed to mention the dates on which the loans and advances were allegedly taken by the deceased employee and what is the precise amount, in each such transactions. 6. Furthermore, the latest written instruction dated 19.04.2017 received by the standing counsel, also fails to disclose why the total payment made under the CPF head is shown to be Rs.2,52,856/- and conspicuously, there is no explanation as to why the employee’s contribution to the tune of Rs.1,54,240/-, is withheld by the Khadi Board. It is also difficult to ignore that the employee died in harness and it is hardly possible for the widow to have access to the concerned records. Therefore, the employer is duty bound to justify the withholding of the sum of Rs.1,54,240/-, which is a portion of the employee’s CPF contribution, to the tune of Rs.2,03,548/-, in disbursing payment to the petitioner. 7. Following the above discussion, in the absence of any specific details on the loans and advances allegedly secured by Late Ikram Rasul, I direct the CEO of the Khadi Board to justify the withholding of the sum of Rs.1,54,240/-, while disbursing the CPF dues to the widow of the employee. To secure the justification from the CEO, the petitioner will submit a representation within 2(two) weeks from today with a copy of this order, whereafter, a speaking order should be passed within 6(six) weeks thereafter, by the CEO. In the ordered exercise, the specific dates of loans/advances should be mentioned with supporting reference to the official records of the Khadi Board. But if such contemporaneous records are not available, the Khadi Board will be duty bound to disburse the entire CPF dues to the writ petitioner. It is ordered accordingly. 8. In the ordered exercise, the specific dates of loans/advances should be mentioned with supporting reference to the official records of the Khadi Board. But if such contemporaneous records are not available, the Khadi Board will be duty bound to disburse the entire CPF dues to the writ petitioner. It is ordered accordingly. 8. With the above order, the case stands disposed of without any order on cost.