Allowed

Chhote Lal v. State of U P and 3 Others

Allahabad HC29 Sept 2021WRIA/11520/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Court held that the petitioner's entitlement to retirement dues is not negated by the Fourth Respondent's default in filing statutory returns with the EPFO. Consequently, the order refusing payment was quashed, directing the release of dues within three months along with 6% interest, while preserving the ER's right to recover the amount.

What did the court decide?

The order refusing payment was quashed. Directing release of entire dues, EPF, gratuity, and group insurance with 6% interest within three months from the due date.

Chhote Lal Vs State of U P and 3 Others — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Allahabad HC (2021)

¶1

Court No. - 2

¶2

Case :- WRIT - A No. - 11520 of 2018

¶3

Petitioner :- Chhote Lal Respondent :- State Of U P And 3 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Awadh Narain Rai,Jamal Ahmad Khan,Satyadeo Shamra Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Sachin Upadhyay

¶4

Hon'ble Suneet Kumar,J.

¶5

Heard learned counsel for the parties.

¶6

In view of the office report dated 16 December 2020, notice upon the fourth respondent has been served.

¶7

Petitioner was an employee of the fourth respondent-Regional Sri Gandhi Ashram, Agra. Petitioner retired on attaining the age of superannuation on 4 June 2017. By the instant writ petition, petitioner seeks quashing of the order dated 8 February 2018, passed by the fourth respondent, wherein, stand has been taken that having regard to the financial status of the organization, the retiral dues towards provident fund, gratuity cannot be released. A direction has been sought for payment of gratuity, provident fund, group insurance from the due date along with interest.

¶8

In the counter affidavit filed on behalf of second and third respondent, Employees Provident Fund Organization, U.P. it is admitted that petitioner was a employee of the fourth respondent and is entitled to the post retiral dues. It is further stated that the fourth respondent did not submit the statutory returns in respect of their employees for the recovered amount at Rs.5900660/-. The major portion of the EPF dues of Rs. 23160307/- is still not deposited by the fourth respondent. This Court in W.P. No. 25315 of 2017, ordered not to take coercive action against the responsible person (Shri Shambhu Nath Chaubey) i.e. fourth respondent. There are total 131 cases pending against the fourth respondent in the court of Chief Judicial Magistrate, Agra, filed by respondent no. 2 (RPFC-Agra) for non submission of statutory returns.

¶9

The stand taken by the respondents that due to financial difficulty the amount cannot be credited is untenable. It is not in dispute that petitioner was the employee of the fourth respondent and is entitled to retiral dues.

¶10

Accordingly, the writ petition is allowed. Order dated 8 February 2018 passed by the fourth respondent is set aside and quashed. The entire amount due to the petitioner, shall be released by the respondents within three months from due date along with interest @ of 6% per annum.

¶11

It will be open to the second and third respondent to recover the amount due from the fourth respondent, in accordance with law.

¶12

Order Date :- 29.9.2021 S.Prakash

Chhote Lal v. State of U P and 3 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Chhote Lal v. State of U P and 3 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Manoj Kumar Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Shrikanti Devi Vs State of U.P. and Another

Ram Singh Modha Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others

Ram Awadh Giri Vs State of U.P. and 3 Ors.

Sudarshan Singh Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Sanjay Yadav and Another Vs State of U.P.