Disposed

Dr.Radhakrishnan Vidhyalaya Matriculation Hr.Sec.School v. the Regional Provident Fund Commissioner

Madras HC24 Oct 2025WP(MD)/302/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

School challenged a prohibitory recovery order under Section 8F of the EPF Act attaching its bank account. With no representation for the petitioner on two listings, and the respondents recording that EPF dues for June 2010 to February 2013 were settled, the writ petition was closed as no further order was required.

What the court decided

AI extract

Dr.Radhakrishnan Vidhyalaya Matriculation… — Service and Employment | Madras HC (2025)

¶1

WP(MD)No.302 of 2022

¶2

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT

¶3

Dated: 24.10.2025

¶4

CORAM:

¶5

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE B.PUGALENDHI

¶6

WP(MD)No.302 of 2022 and WMP(MD)Nos.233 and 234 of 2022

¶7

Dr.Radhakrishnan Vidyhalaya Matriculation Hr Sec School Represented by the Correspondent, A.R.Malairajan,

¶8

... Petitioner

¶9

¶10

1.The Regional Provident Fund Commissioner, Employees' Provident Fund Organisation,

¶11

Bhavishya Nidhi Bhawan, No.1, Lady Doak College Road, Sivakasi, Chokkikulam, Madurai District – 625 002.

¶12

2.The Recovery Officer, Employees Provident Fund Organisation, District Office, AKM Complex, Old Virudhunagar Road, Sivakasi, Virudhunagar District – 626 189.

¶13

3.The Branch Manager, State Bank of India, Sattur, Virudhunagar District – 626 124. ... Respondents

¶14

PRAYER: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for issuance of a writ of certiorarified mandamus to call for the

¶15

1/5

¶16

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

¶17

WP(MD)No.302 of 2022

¶18

records pertaining to the impguned prohibitory order in MD/MDU/24597/Recy/CP-3/-10/2021, dated 27.12.2021 on the file of the respondent No.2 and to quash the same as illegal and consequently defreeze the petitioner's current account No.35489761389 attached with the PF account No.MD/MDU/24597 in the respondent No.3.

¶19

For Petitioner : No representation For Respondent : Mr.R.Ravikumar Nos.1 and 2 For Respondent : Mr.C.Karthick No.3

¶20

ORDER

¶21

This writ petition is filed as against the order of recovery passed by the respondent Nos.1 and 2 under Section 8F of the Employees' Provident Funds and Miscellaneous Provisions Act.

¶22

2.When this writ petition was taken up for hearing on 09.10.2020,

¶23

there was no representation for the petitioner. In order to provide one more opportunity the case has been listed today. Even today there is no representation for the petitioner.

¶24

2/5

¶25

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

¶26

WP(MD)No.302 of 2022

¶27

3.The learned counsel for the respondent Nos.1 and 2 by referring

¶28

to the proceedings dated 03.09.2024 of the EPF authority submits that the dues towards the EPF contribution for the period from June 2010 to February 2013 was settled by the petitioner management.

¶29

4.Recording the submission of the learned counsel for the respondent Nos.1 and 2 and the proceedings dated 03.09.2024, this writ petition is closed, as no further order is required. No costs. Consequently connected miscellaneous petitions are closed.

¶30

24.10.2025

¶31

Internet : Yes / No DSK

¶32

3/5

¶33

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

¶34

WP(MD)No.302 of 2022

¶35

¶36

1.The Regional Provident Fund Commissioner, Employees' Provident Fund Organisation,

¶37

Bhavishya Nidhi Bhawan, No.1, Lady Doak College Road, Sivakasi, Chokkikulam, Madurai District – 625 002.

¶38

2.The Recovery Officer, Employees Provident Fund Organisation, District Office, AKM Complex, Old Virudhunagar Road, Sivakasi, Virudhunagar District – 626 189.

¶39

3.The Branch Manager, State Bank of India, Sattur, Virudhunagar District – 626 124.

¶40

4/5

¶41

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

¶42

WP(MD)No.302 of 2022

¶43

B.PUGALENDHI, J.

¶44

dsk

¶45

WP(MD)No.302 of 2022

¶46

24.10.2025

¶47

5/5

¶48

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

Dr.Radhakrishnan Vidhyalaya Matriculation Hr.Sec.School v. the Regional Provident Fund Commissioner

Case brief

What is this about?

What the court decided

Dr.Radhakrishnan Vidhyalaya Matriculation Hr.Sec.School v. the Regional Provident Fund Commissioner

Case brief

What is this about?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

M/s. Kanyakumari Medical Mission Hospital Vs The State of Tamil Nadu

M/s. Kanyakumari Medical Mission Hospital Vs The State of Tamil Nadu

The Management Vs General Secretary

The Management Vs the Controlling Authority Under

The General Secretary, Vs The Labour Court

The Management Vs Arun Kumar.H