Disposed

Haribansh Chaubey and 6 Others v. Regional Provident Fund Commissioner Provident Fund Office Lko. and Another

Allahabad HC31 Jul 2024/3946/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The court disposed of the writ petition against the Regional Provident Fund Commissioner as the Provident Fund amount had already been credited to the petitioners' accounts, rendering further monetary directions unnecessary. The respondents undertook to initiate recovery proceedings under the Act.

What did the court decide?

No further directions required regarding the deposit as the amount was already credited; respondents to initiate proceedings under Sections 7Q and 14B.

Haribansh Chaubey and 6 Others Vs Regional… — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Allahabad HC (2024)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC-LKO:52220

¶2

Court No. - 7

¶3

Case :- WRIT - C No. - 3946 of 2024

¶4

Petitioner :- Haribansh Chaubey And 6 Others Respondent :- Regional Provident Fund Commissioner Provident Fund Office Lko. And Another Counsel for Petitioner :- Kirti Kar Tripathi,Shrikant Tripathi Counsel for Respondent :- Akhilesh Pratap Singh,Krishna Kumar Pandey

¶5

Hon'ble Alok Mathur,J.

¶6

Heard Sri Kirti Kar Tripathi, learned counsel for the petitioners as well as Sri Krishna Kumar Pandey, learned counsel appearing for respondent no. 1.

¶7

The dispute in the present case pertains to transfer of the amount which had already been realised by the respondents from the employer of the petitioners and is lying with them since 24.05.2011.

¶8

In pursuance to the directions of this Court short counter affidavit has been filed on behalf of the Regional Provident Fund Commissioner - II, Raibareily stating that the amount of Provident Fund recovered from respondent no. 2 has been credited in the PPF Accounts of the petitioners with up to date interest in the opening balance of 2023-24. Said fact has also been stated in the order dated 23.07.2024, a copy of which has been annexed alongwith the short counter affidavit.

¶9

Learned counsel for the petitioners also does not dispute the fact that the said amount has been credited to the PPF Accounts of the petitioners and accordingly no further directions in this regard are required to be passed by this Court.

¶10

Lastly, after deposit of the aforesaid amount in the PPF Accounts of the petitioners, the petitioners are required to complete certain formalities of signing joint declaration form and learned counsel for the petitioners undertake to complete the said formalities within two weeks from today and submit the joint declaration form with the respondents.

¶11

Another issue raised by the petitioners is with regard to proceedings under Section 7Q and 14B of the Employees Provident Fund and Miscellaneous Provisions Act, 1952 where proceedings have to be initiated by respondent no. 1 against

¶12

respondent no. 2 under Section 7Q and 14B of the Act, 1952.

¶13

Learned counsel for the respondents on the basis of instructions has submitted that they shall shortly initiate the proceedings under Sections 7Q and 14B of the Act, 1952 in accordance with law.

¶14

In the light of above, no further directions are required to be passed since as per averments made in the short counter affidavit, the amount of PPF has already been deposited in the PF accounts of the petitioners.

¶15

In the light of factual aspects recorded herein above, present writ petition stands disposed of .

¶16

Order Date :- 31.7.2024 A. Verma

¶17

(Alok Mathur, J.)

¶18

Digitally signed by :- ANURAG VERMA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Haribansh Chaubey and 6 Others v. Regional Provident Fund Commissioner Provident Fund Office Lko. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Haribansh Chaubey and 6 Others v. Regional Provident Fund Commissioner Provident Fund Office Lko. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Pitambar Vs State of U.P Thru. Distt. Magistrate Distt. Raebareli and 4 Others

Devmani Mishra Vs State of U.P. Thru. Secy. Revenue, Lko. and 6 Others

Moradhvaj Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. (Revenue), Lucknow and Others

Ram Shabd Vs Sub Divisional Magistrate , Jaisinghpur , Sultanpur and Others

Abid Ali Vs Civil Judge (Jr.Div) Lalganj Pratapgarh and 3 Others

Devendra Kumar Yadav Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy., Food and Civil Supplies, Lucknow and Another