Disposed

Rajakesavan.E v. Employees Provident Fund Organization

Kerala HC16 Jul 2020WP(C)/14397/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Court disposed of this writ petition, directing the Assistant Provident Fund Commissioner to consider the petitioner's representation for a higher pension and pass orders within six weeks. The petitioner must produce the writ petition and judgment copies with the respondent.

What did the court decide?

The second respondent is directed to consider and pass orders on Ext.P4 representation within six weeks after hearing the petitioner.

Rajakesavan.E Vs Employees Provident Fund… — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Kerala HC (2020)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.K.JAYASANKARAN NAMBIAR

¶4

THURSDAY, THE 16TH DAY OF JULY 2020 / 25TH ASHADHA, 1942 WP(C).No.14397 OF 2020

¶5

PETITIONER/S:

¶6

RAJAKESAVAN.E AGED 52 YEARS REVATHY, AMBUNADU, EDATHALA P.O., PUKKATTUPADI, ERNAKULAM-683 561.

¶7

BY ADVS. SRI.DEEPU THANKAN SMT.UMMUL FIDA SMT.LAKSHMI SREEDHAR

¶8

RESPONDENT/S:

¶9

1 EMPLOYEES PROVIDENT FUND ORGANIZATION BHAVISHYANIDHI BHAVAN, NEW DELHI-110 066, REPRESENTED BY THE CENTRAL PROVIDENT FUND COMMISSIONER.

¶10

2 THE ASSISTANT PROVIDENT FUND COMMISSIONER, EMPLOYEES PROVIDENT FUND ORGANIZATION, SUB REGIONAL OFFICE, BHAVISHYANIDHI BHAVAN, KALOOR, KOCHI-682 017.

¶11

3 KERALA LIVESTOCK DEVELOPMENT BOARD LTD., GOKULAM, PATTAM, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 004, REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR.

¶12

OTHER PRESENT:

¶13

SC: MILLU DANDAPANI R3.SC. NITA N.S R1, R2

¶14

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 16.07.2020, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶15

WP(C).No.14397 OF 2020

¶16

J U D G M E N T

¶17

The petitioner has preferred Ext.P4 representation before the 2^nd respondent seeking the benefit of a higher pension under the Employees' Provident Funds and Miscellaneous Provisions Act. The limited prayer in the writ petition, at this stage, is for a direction to the 2^nd respondent to consider and pass orders on Ext.P4 representation, expeditiously, taking note of the decided case laws on the subject.

¶18

I have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner as also the learned Standing Counsel for the respondents.

¶19

On a consideration of the facts and circumstances of the case as also the submissions made across the bar, I dispose the writ petition with a direction to the 2^nd respondent to consider and pass orders on Ext.P4 representation within six weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment, after hearing the petitioner. The petitioner shall produce a copy of the writ petition together with a copy of this judgment, before the 2^nd respondent for further action.

¶20

Sd/-

¶21

A.K.JAYASANKARAN NAMBIAR

¶22

JUDGE

¶23

¶24

WP(C).No.14397 OF 2020

¶25

¶26

APPENDIX

¶27

PETITIONER'S/S EXHIBITS:

¶28

EXHIBIT P1 TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT OF THIS HON'BLE COURT IN WPC NO.33185/2014 DATED 16.12.2014.

¶29

EXHIBIT P2 TRUE COPY OF THE AMENDMENT AS PER GSR NO.609(E) DATED 22.08.2014.

¶30

EXHIBIT P3 TRUE COPY OF THE PENSION PAYMENT ORDER EPS95 ISSUED BY THE SECOND RESPONDENT DATED NIL.

¶31

EXHIBIT P4 REPRESENTATION SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER TO THE SECOND RESPONDENT DATED 01.06.2020.

Rajakesavan.E v. Employees Provident Fund Organization

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Rajakesavan.E v. Employees Provident Fund Organization

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

Similar cases

The Mundur Service Co-Operative Bank Ltd. R.189 Vs the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal

Muthukulam Block Agricultural Improvement Co-Operative Society, Vs Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)

Prasadkumar.C.R Vs Union of India

Saiju.L Vs Commercial Tax Officer

Sugumathi Vs Assistant Sales Tax Officer

Sudhakaran K.R. Vs Employees Provident Fund Orginzation