Partly allowed

Indira Anothony Raj v. the Assistant Commissioner

Madras HC8 Aug 2025WP/29817/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Madras, in a writ petition, directed the respondent authorities to release eligible pension arrears with interest due to an employer's clerical error. It also ordered corrections to the order copy to reference a specific representation filed by the petitioner.

What did the court decide?

Direction to release pension arrears from 06.07.2022 with 12% interest within two months and correct the order to include a reference to a representation.

Indira Anothony Raj Vs the Assistant… — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Madras HC (2025)

¶1

W.P.No.29817 of 2025

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶3

Dated : 08.08.2025

¶4

CORAM

¶5

THE HONOURABLE Ms. JUSTICE P.T. ASHA

¶6

W.P.No. 29817 of 2025

¶7

Indira Anthony Raj S2, Sai Sajara Apartments, AVM Avenue, 2^nd Cross Street, Virugambakkam Chennai – 600 092.

¶8

...Petitioner

¶9

Vs.

¶10

1.The Assistant Commissioner (Pension) Provident Fund Office Royapettah, 600014.

¶11

2.The Regional Commissioner, Provident Fund Office Royapettah, Chennai 600 014

¶12

3.National Data Centre (EPFO, NDC) 1^st Floor, EPFO Complex Plot No.23, Sector 23, Dwarka, New Delhi 110075 ...Respondents

¶13

Prayer: Writ Petition is filed under Section 226 of the Constitution of

¶14

1/9

¶15

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶16

W.P.No.29817 of 2025

¶17

India for issue of Writ of Mandamus, directing the respondents herein to release the eligible pension arrears to the petitioner with effect from

¶18

06.07.2022 with interest at the rate of 12% and continue to pay the

¶19

permissible pension under the Employees Pension Scheme.

¶20

For Petitioner : Ms. S.Suneetha

¶21

For Respondents : Mr. S.Tamil Eniyan For Mr. R.Vishnu

¶22

O R D E R

¶23

The Writ Petition is filed for the following relief:

¶24

“directing the respondents herein to release the eligible pension arrears to the petitioner with effect from 06.07.2022 with interest at the rate of 12% and continue to pay the permissible pension under the Employees Pension Scheme”.

¶25

The petitioner would submit that she was under employment

¶26

on various companies in private sector. The petitioner would submit that as per the statutory scheme of the Government the petitioner had to mandatorily join the scheme under the Employees Pension Scheme and

¶27

2/9

¶28

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶29

W.P.No.29817 of 2025

¶30

mandatory deductions were made from the petitioner's salary by all her employers every month as per the scheme.

¶31

The Scheme contemplated a maximum deduction of Rs.3600/per month as Provident Fund and Pension, out of which Rs.1250/- has to be transferred to the Employees Pension Scheme. That the amounts have been credited to the petitioner's Provident Fund are reflected from the fact that the same are shown to the petitioner's credit in her Provident Fund as well as the employee's pension scheme account.

¶32

As per the Provident Fund Scheme, the petitioner is entitled to withdraw the amount to her credit at the time of retirement which she has also done and there is no issue so far as the deduction and payment out of her Provident Fund. There seems to be a minor error in so far as the petitioner is concerned, as her last employer “Neuberg Ehlrich Pvt., Ltd.,” has by mistake uploaded the petitioner's particulars as “non pensionable employee”. Therefore, the petitioner is before this Court.

¶33

3/9

¶34

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶35

W.P.No.29817 of 2025

¶36

Heard the learned counsels and perused the records.

¶37

Considering the fact that deduction has been made from the

¶38

petitioner's salary towards Employee's Pension Scheme and the fact that the mistake is only on the part of the employer, the respondents are directed to release the eligible pension arrears to the petitioner with effect from 06.07.2022 with interest at the rate of 12%, within a period of 2 months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order and continue to pay the permissible pension under the Employees Pension Scheme.

¶39

The Writ Petition is allowed with the above directions. No

¶40

costs.

¶41

08.08.2025

¶42

Index : Yes/No Internet : Yes/No kan

¶43

¶44

1.The Assistant Commissioner (Pension)

¶45

4/9

¶46

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶47

W.P.No.29817 of 2025

¶48

Provident Fund Office Royapettah, 600014.

¶49

2.The Regional Commissioner, Provident Fund Office Royapettah, Chennai 600 014

¶50

3.National Data Centre (EPFO, NDC) 1^st Floor, EPFO Complex Plot No.23, Sector 23, Dwarka, New Delhi 110075

P.T. ASHA, J

kan

5/9

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶55

W.P.No.29817 of 2025

¶56

W.P.No. 29817 of 2025

¶57

08.08.2025

¶58

W.P.No.29817 of 2025 and W.M.P.No.33440 of 2025

¶59

6/9

¶60

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶61

W.P.No.29817 of 2025

¶62

P.T.ASHA J.

¶63

This case is listed today under the caption 'for being mentioned' at the

¶64

instance of the learned Counsel for the petitioner.

¶65

The learned Counsel for the petitioner would submit that in the Order copy dated 08.08.2025, it is prayed that the phrase 'consider the representation dated 02.07.2025' be included in the operative portion of the Order in Paragraph 6 which has been omitted to be included though in the open Court directions were issued for considering the representation.

¶66

Based on the submission of the learned Counsel for the petitioner,

¶67

the below changes are to be effected in the order copy dated 08.08.2025.

¶68

(i) Paragraph 6 of the order shall be replaced as follows:

¶69

6. Considering the fact that deduction has been made

¶70

from the petitioner's salary towards Employee's Pension Scheme and the fact that the mistake is only on the part of the employer, the respondents are directed to consider the representation dated 02.07.2025 and release the eligible

¶71

7/9

¶72

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶73

W.P.No.29817 of 2025

¶74

pension arrears to the petitioner with effect from 06.07.2022 with interest at the rate of 12% within a period of 2 months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order and continue to pay the permissible pension under the Employees Pension Scheme.

¶75

It is also seen that, by inadvertence, the miscellaneous petition has not been closed. The same now stands closed.

¶76

Registry is directed to carry out the necessary corrections and issue

¶77

fresh copy of the order to the parties.

29.08.2025

shl

P.T.ASHA J.

shl

8/9

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶84

W.P.No.29817 of 2025

¶85

W.P.No.29817 of 2025 and W.M.P.No.33440 of 2025

¶86

29.08.2025

¶87

9/9

¶88

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

Indira Anothony Raj v. the Assistant Commissioner

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Indira Anothony Raj v. the Assistant Commissioner

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

Annamalai University Vs the Additional Commissioner of Labour

The Management Vs T.Raja

Asmitha Alankritha Vs Ashwanth Pothy

V.Gopi Vs The Deputy Registrar

C.Gunasekaran Vs The Deputy Registrar

Babu Ganesh Vs the District Magistrate