Tapan Kumar Chatterjee v. Employees Provident Fund Organisation & ORS

17.04.2023 sb Ct 550

IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA

CONSTITUTIONAL WRIT JURISDICTION APPELLATE SIDE WPA 10327 of 2017 Tapan Kumar Chatterjee Vs.

Employees Provident Fund Organisation & Ors.

Mr. Ajitesh Pandey Mr. Zohaib Rauf Mr. Barnamoy Basak ... For the petitioner.

Mr. Shiv Chandra Prasad ... For the respondent nos. 1 to 3.

Mr. S. R. Saha .... For the respondent nos. 4 and 5.

The present writ petition has been filed, inter alia, praying for a direction upon the respondent nos. 4 and 5 to take steps for processing the petitioner's provident fund linked pension.

Mr.

Saha, learned advocate representing the respondent nos. 4 and 5 submits that subsequent to filing of the aforesaid writ petition, the respondents have already taken steps in the matter and have processed the petitioner's application for provident fund linked pension. By drawing attention of this Court to a communication issued by the respondent no.4, dated 6th July, 2022, addressed to the Assistant Provident Fund Commissioner (Ex-Pension I), it is submitted that the petitioner's

application for pension has already been processed at their end.

Mr. Prasad, learned advocate representing the provident fund authorities submits that on the basis of the application made by the petitioner and pursuant to the communication issued by the respondent no.4, the provident fund authorities have already taken steps and a pension payment order has also been issued in favour of the petitioner. The petitioner is receiving regular pension of Rs.1329/- per month.

Mr. Pandey, learned advocate representing the petitioner submits that the petitioner, apart form the aforesaid claim, is also entitled to the interest on delayed disbursal of provident fund accumulations.

Heard the learned advocates appearing for the respective parties and considered the materials on record. I, however, find that the present writ petition is confined to the prayer for processing the petitioner's provident fund linked pension. In view thereof, nothing further survives in the present writ petition and the same is accordingly disposed of.

The aforesaid order shall, however, not prevent the petitioner from taking appropriate steps for recovery of his dues if any from the respondent nos. 4 and 5, if so advised.

Urgent photostat certified copy of this order, if applied for, be given to the parties upon compliance of necessary formalities.

(Raja Basu Chowdhury, J.)