Janki Devi v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.19432 of 2024 ====================================================== Janki Devi Wife of Late Ram Babu Ravidas Resident of Village-Dariyapur P.S.- Dariyapur, District-Patna.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1.
The State of Bihar through the Principal Secretary, Department of Agriculture, Government of Bihar, Patna.
2.
The Director, Bihar State Seed Corporation Limited, Patna. 3.
The Director Administration, Bihar State Seed Corporation Limited, Meethapur, Patna.
4.
The Account Officer, Employee Provident Fund Office, Patna. 5.
The Regional Commissioner EPFO, R Block Road No.6 Patna. ... ... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Dileep Kumar Jha, Adv Mr. Sonu Kumar, Adv For the Respondent Nos. 2, 3 : Mr. Aditya Pandey, Adv For the Respondent Nos. 4, 5 : Mr. Vikash Jha, AC to GA- 9 ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE AJIT KUMAR ORAL ORDER 22-08-2025 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the respondents.
2. Learned counsel for the petitioner prays for following reliefs:- (i) For issuance of writ/writs in the nature of mandamus Commanding the Respondents to immediately grant monthly pension and final pension on employee provident fund of the husband of the petitioner who has been died while the deceased employee was worked in Bihar State Seed Corporation Limited, Patna;
(ii) For commanding the Respondent
Patna High Court CWJC No.19432 of 2024(2) dt.22-08-2025 2/3 to immediately pay the final amount of the deposited in the employee provident fund of the Deceased employee who was the husband of the petitioner and has been died.
(iii) For Commanding the Respondent as to why the petitioner has not getting the monthly pension on employee provident fund of her deceased husband and the corporation has not paid the final employee provident fund amount to the petitioner.
3. At this stage, learned counsel for the Respondent No. 4 and 5 submits that the petitioner has not approached for allowing the authorities to start pension, as is admissible under the Employee Provident Fund (EPFO) for which the deductions were made by the employee.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner makes a serious objection by saying that Annexure P-2, which goes to show that the employe has already requested the Regional Commissioner, EPFO, R Block Road No. 6, Patna vide letter no. B.N./Esth23/97 (III)-95 dated 13.01.2022 but for the reason unexplained the said pension has not been started.
5. Learned counsel for the Respondent No. 2 and 3 has stated that the letter which is being referred by the learned counsel for the petitioner has not yet been received.
6. Be that as it may, learned counsel for the petitioner is directed to file and submit an application as per the requisites,
Patna High Court CWJC No.19432 of 2024(2) dt.22-08-2025 3/3 the EPFO has formulated for the purpose of starting pension and, if that is done, the pension would be processed within a period of four weeks.
7. It goes without saying that all the arrears due in favour of the petitioner with respect to pension shall be disbursed in his favour in one go.
8. Accordingly, the writ application stands disposed off.
(Ajit Kumar, J) Jyoti/- U T