Jebas Jeyaseelan v. The Commissioner

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED:02.03.2023

CORAM:

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE M.DHANDAPANI Jebas Jeyaseelan ... Petitioner Vs.

1.The Commissioner, Treasuries and Accounts, CPS Cell, Government Data Centre, Integrated Complex for Finance Department, No.571, 5th Floor, Perasiriyar K.Anbalagan Maligai, Anna Salai, Nandanam, Chennai.

2.The Commissioner, Aruppukottai Municipality, Aruppukottai, Virudhunagar District. .. Respondents Prayer:Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, to issue a Writ of Mandamus directing the respondents herein to pay the petitioner's difference employees provident amount payable to the petitioner and admitted by the second respondent through RTI on the 1/5

basis of the petitioner's representation dated 31.03.2021 within the time stipulated by this Court.

For Petitioner : Mr.S.Sathya Chidambaram For R-1 : Mr.C.Satheesh, Government Advocate For R-2 : Mr.N.Dilip Kumar

O R D E R

This writ petition has been filed for a direction to the respondents to pay the petitioner, the difference of Employees Provident Fund amount payable to the petitioner and admitted by the second respondent through RTI, on the basis of the petitioner's representation, dated 31.03.2021, within a specified period.

2. The case of the petitioner is that he joined the services as Revenue Assistant under the second respondent on 16.07.2007 and after serving many years, the petitioner retired on 30.04.2019. The grievance of the petitioner is that the respondents have erroneously calculated the Employees Provident Fund amount. The same was confirmed by the respondents when the petitioner made a query under the RTI Act. Hence, the petitioner has made a representation to the respondents on 2/5

31.03.2021 requesting to pay the differential amount payable to the petitioner. The said representation was not considered so far. Hence, the petitioner has filed this writ petition with the aforesaid prayer.

3. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would submit that it would suffice, if the respondents are directed to dispose of the representation of the petitioner, dated 31.03.2021, on merits and in accordance with law, within a specified period.

4. The learned Government Advocate appearing for the first respondent and the learned standing counsel appearing for the second respondent, has no serious objection for such an order being passed by this Court.

5. Considering the limited request made by the learned counsel for the petitioner, this Court, without going into the merits of the matter, directs the respondents to consider the petitioner's representation, dated 31.03.2021 and pass appropriate orders, on merits and in accordance with 3/5

law, within a period of twelve weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.

6. With the above direction, this Writ Petition is disposed of. No costs.

02.03.2023 pm Index:Yes/No To 1.The Commissioner, Treasuries and Accounts, CPS Cell, Government Data Centre, Integrated Complex for Finance Department, No.571, 5th Floor, Perasiriyar K.Anbalagan Maligai, Anna Salai, Nandanam, Chennai.

2.The Commissioner, Aruppukottai Municipality, Aruppukottai, Virudhunagar District.

4/5

M.DHANDAPANI,J.

pm 02.03.2023 5/5