Disposed

Jagdish Prasad v. Regional Provident Fund Commissioner Ist and 2 Others

Allahabad HC11 May 2022WRIC/12519/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioner claimed non-payment of provident fund and pension. The court disposed of the writ petition, directing the petitioner to file a fresh compliant application. Upon receipt, the respondent must entertain the claim merit-wise and pass a reasoned order within six months.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner directed to file a fresh compliant application; if filed, respondent to entertain claim and pass reasoned order within six months.

Jagdish Prasad Vs Regional Provident Fund… — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Allahabad HC (2022)

¶1

Court No. - 38

¶2

Case :- WRIT - C No. - 12519 of 2022

¶3

Petitioner :- Jagdish Prasad Respondent :- Regional Provident Fund Commissioner Ist And 2 Others

¶4

Counsel for Petitioner :- Jamal Ahmad Khan Counsel for Respondent :- Sachindra Upadhyay,Adarsh Bhushan

¶5

Hon'ble Saumitra Dayal Singh,J.

¶6

Heard Shri Jamal Ahmad Khan, learned counsel for the petitioner; Shri Jagdish Pathak, learned counsel for respondent no.1 and; Shri Abhay Singh Tomar, Advocate, holding brief of learned counsel for respondent employer.

¶7

At present, petitioner claims non-payment of provident fund and pension.

¶8

On the other hand, learned counsel for Provident Fund Commissioner (respondent no.1) submits, the applicability of the Employees Provident Fund Act, 1952, to the present petitioner is doubtful. Also, it is doubtful, if the petitioner is entitled to any further payments of provident fund, etc. in view of two termination orders suffered by him during the course of service rendered by the petitioner to Uttar Pradesh State Transport Corporation, Agra.

¶9

While such and other are the submissions advanced by learned counsel for the parties, at present, it cannot be disputed, the petitioner has made a claim before the respondent no.1 on 08.05.2019 and, again, on 24.01.2020. Those are stated to be pending.

¶10

In view of the above, since no decision has been made by

¶11

the respondent, no useful purpose may be served in keeping the present petition pending or calling for counter affidavit.

¶12

Accordingly, the present petition is disposed of , with a direction, in case, the petitioner files a fresh application on prescribed proforma after complying with statutory requirements, within a period of two weeks from today along with a copy of this order, the said claim may be entertained on its own merits, strictly in accordance with law and reasoned order may be passed dealing with the claim made by the petitioner, as expeditiously as possible, preferably within a period of six months, after hearing all necessary parties.

¶13

Order Date :- 11.5.2022 Prakhar

¶14

Digitally signed by PRAKHAR SRIVASTAVA Date: 2022.05.12 09:58:31 IST Reason: Location: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Jagdish Prasad v. Regional Provident Fund Commissioner Ist and 2 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Jagdish Prasad v. Regional Provident Fund Commissioner Ist and 2 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Shashikant Gupta Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Komal Singh Vs State of U.P. and Another

Management of United Spirits Limited Vs Deputy Labour Commissioner U.P. and Another

Gram Sabha Kundidih Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Khempal Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Jai Jairam Vs Employees Compensation and Another