Purushottam Prasanna Mishra v. The Union Labour Ministry,Govt

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No. 8118 of 2012 =========================================================== Purushottam Prasanna Mishra, Son of Late Krishna Kumar Mishra, Resident of Village- Kumar Bajitpur, P.S.-Patepur, District- Vaishali, Presently Residing at Mohalla- Birla Colony, Patna.

.... .... Petitioner/s

Versus

1. The Union Labour Ministry Govt. of India, New Delhi.

2. The Regional Manager, P.T.I. Office 357 Dr. D.N. Road, Fort Mumbai - 406001.

3. Central Provident Fund Commissioner, New Delhi.

4. Regional Provident Fund Commissioner, Mumbai.

5. Manager, P.T.I. Office, Patna.

.... .... Respondent/s =========================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s : Mr.

For the Respondent/ : Mr.

=========================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE AHSANUDDIN AMANULLAH ORAL JUDGMENT Date: 29-10-2015 Nobody appears on behalf of the petitioner.

Learned counsel for the respondents no. 2 and 5 submits that as per the Provident Fund Rules (hearinafter referred to as the 'Rules') of the Press Trust of India Limited, the petitioner became entitled to membership into the Provident Fund Scheme on 01.02.1988 and ceased to be a member upon superannuation on 25.03.1997 and thus the period being less than 10 years is not pensionable. It is further submitted that the membership to the Fund was after six months spent on probation which is also as per Rule 22 of the Rules.

In view of the stand of learned counsel for the respondents no. 2 and 5, on the prayer made by learned counsel for the petitioner, the case was adjourned on 29.09.2015 and

Patna High Court CWJC No.8118 of 2012 dt.29-10-2015 2/2 06.10.2015.

No rejoinder has been filed on the said point and further nothing has been brought to show that the petitioner is entitled to pension in accordance with law.

In view of the aforesaid, the Court does not find any ground to interfere in the matter and accordingly the writ petition stands dismissed.

(Ahsanuddin Amanullah, J.) P. Kumar U T