Allowed

A.Thomas v. The Assistant Pf Commissioner

Madras HC27 Apr 2016WP/11971/2016

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This writ petition challenged the PF Commissioner's requirement for a Revenue Authority certificate to prove the identity of the wife before settling her Provident Fund. The Court disposed of the petition directing the settlement of the fund without insisting on such a certificate.

What did the court decide?

Writ of Mandamus directing the Respondent to settle the Employees' Provident Fund of the petitioner's wife without insisting on a certificate from Revenue Authorities.

A.Thomas Vs The Assistant Pf Commissioner — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Madras HC (2016)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶2

DATE: 27.04.2016

¶3

CORAM

¶4

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE T.S.SIVAGNANAM

¶5

W.P.No.11971 of 2016

¶6

A.Thomas .. Petitioner

¶7

The Assistant PF Commissioner, Employees' Provident Fund Organization, No.3, Municipal Building, Rajaji Salai, Chennai-600 045. .. Respondent

¶8

Prayer: This Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, seeking for a Writ of Mandamus, to direct the respondent to settle the Employees' Provident Fund of the petitioner's wife namely, J.Manimegala @ T.Marimarthal, without insisting certificate of Revenue Authorities that the person called J.Manimegala @ T.Marimarthal are one and the same person as by its letter dated 30.09.2015.

¶9

Heard Mr.S.Arivazhagan, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and Mr.K.Ramu, learned counsel, accepting notice on behalf of respondent. With the consent of the learned counsel on either side, the Writ Petition is taken up for final disposal.

¶10

The petitioner has filed this Writ Petition, for issuance of a Writ of Mandamus, to direct the respondent to settle the Employees' Provident Fund of the petitioner's wife namely, J.Manimegala @ T.Marimarthal, without insisting certificate of Revenue Authorities that the person called J.Manimegala @ T.Marimarthal are one and the same person as by its letter dated 30.09.2015.

¶11

According to the petitioner, his wife's name was J.Manimegala and after marriage, she has converted herself to Christianity and her name has been changed as T.Marimarthal.

¶12

https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

¶13

Therefore, the petitioner states that taking note of this fact, the respondent-Organization may pay the petitioner, the eligible amount retained by the respondent-Organization.

¶14

On a perusal of the Communication dated 30.09.2015, issued by the Assistant Provident Fund Commissioner, it is seen that the petitioner's claim has not been rejected and it has been stated that the respondent requires proof to show that both the person is one and the same. Therefore, the petitioner has to necessarily produce appropriate record to show that the petitioner's wife-J.Manimegala is also known as T.Marimarthal. Therefore, on the petitioner complying with the direction issued by the respondent vide Communication dated 30.09.2015, the amount shall be given.

¶15

The Writ Petition is disposed of on the above terms. No costs. r n s s/dAssistant Registrar(CO) True Copy Sub-Assistant Registrar To The Assistant PF Commissioner, Employees' Provident Fund Organization, No.3, Municipal Building, Rajaji Salai, Chennai-600 045. + 1 cc to Mr.S.Arivazhagan, Advocate, SR 26481 + 1 cc to Mr.K.Ramu, Advocate, SR 26375 ks(co) prk19/5 W.P.No.11971 of 2016

¶16

https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

A.Thomas v. The Assistant Pf Commissioner

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

A.Thomas v. The Assistant Pf Commissioner

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

V.Karuppusamy Vs Deputy Registrar of Coop.

M/s. Ksm Nirman Pvt. Ltd, Vs The Commissioner

The Management, Vs Presiding Officer

G. Shanmugam Vs The District Collector

N.Murali Vs Regional Labour Commissioner

B.Muthulakshmi Vs The Executive Engineer