Madras High CourtWP(MD)/1841/2016dismissed as infructuous

Nn 566 Oyikottai Primary v. The Assistant Provident Fund

2023-06-13Honourable Mrs Justice S.Srimathy4 pages

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED: 13.06.2023

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MRS.JUSTICE S.SRIMATHY and W.M.P(MD)Nos.1590 & 15911 of 2016 NN 566 Oyikottai Primary Agricultural Cooperative Bank, Oyikottai Post, Thiruvadanai, Ramanathapuram District. ... Petitioner in W.P.(MD)No.1841of 2016 Pannaikadu Primary Agricultural Co-operative Bank, represented by its Secretary, Pannaikadu. ... Petitioner in W.P.(MD)No.1842 of 2016 Vs.

The Assistant Provident Fund Commissioner Employees Provident Fund Organization, Sub-Regional office, Madurai.

... Respondents in both the Petitions PRAYER in W.P(MD)No.1841 of 2016: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for issuance of Writ of Certiorari, order or direction against the order of the respondent in No.TN/MDU/24858/PDC/Circle 5/8F/2015 1/4

dated 10.11.2015 in the nature of writ calling for the records on the file of the respondent and quash the same.

PRAYER in W.P(MD)No.1842 of 2016: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for issuance of Writ of Certiorari, order or direction against the order of the respondent in No.TN/MDU/PDC/8F/2015 dated 20.08.2015 in the nature of writ calling for the records on the file of the respondent and quash the same.

In both the Writ Petitions For Petitioner : Mr.V.O.S.Kalaiselvam For Respondent : Mr.P.Karthick, Standing Counsel COMMON ORDER Since the issue involved in both the Writ Petitions are similar in nature both the writ petitions are taken up together and disposed of by a common order.

2. The petitioners have filed these writ petitions challenging the impugned orders passed by the respondent under Section 8F of the Employees' 2/4

Provident Funds And Miscellaneous Provisions Act, 1952.

3. Today, when the matters are taken up for hearing, the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner as well as the learned Standing Counsel appearing for the respondent submitted that, in the meanwhile, they have preferred an appeal before the Tribunal and the Tribunal has dismissed the petition. The statement is recorded.

4. Recording the said submission, there is nothing survives for adjudication. Hence, these Writ Petitions are dismissed as infructuous. No Costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petitions are closed. Index : Yes / No 13.06.2023 Internet : Yes ksa 3/4

S.SRIMATHY, J ksa Common Order made in 13.06.2023 4/4