High Court directed respondent to consider and dispose of petitioner's representation within three months regarding higher pension and EPF Scheme benefits without expressing opinion on merits.
Order directed responding party to consider and dispose of petitioner's representation within three months.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
W.P. (C) No. 23252 of 2015
04.01.2016 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner.
The petitioner has filed this application seeking a direction to opposite party n
o.1 to accept the option exercised by him for higher pension in terms of the representation vi
de Annexure-3 and to extend the consequential benefits available under the EPF Scheme 1995 at
par with the retired employees of other District Central Co-operative Banks of the State.
Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has filed a repres
entation to that extent before opposite party no.1 vides Anexure-3 which is still pending for
consideration and direction may be given to consider the same.
Considering the contentions raised by the learned counsel for the petitioner and
without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case this Court disposes of the writ petit
ion directing opposite party no.1 to consider and dispose of the representation filed by the p
etitioner in Annexure-3 within a period of three months from the date of communication of this
order.
Requisites for communication of this order to opposite party no.1 shall be filed
within a week.
Urgent certified copy of this order be granted on proper application.
Dr. B. R. Sarangi, J.
1 issue framed by the court
Whether High Court shall direct respondent to accept petitioner's representation for higher pension and extend EPF Scheme benefits at par with other District Central Co-operative Bank employees.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Petitioner
Opposite Party no.1
Dr. B. R. Sarangi
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court