Gujarat High Court Case Information System
Print
SCA/22502/2007 2/ 2 ORDER
IN
THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
SPECIAL
CIVIL APPLICATION No. 22502 of 2007
=========================================================
MANIBHAI
VANABHAI VALAND - Petitioner(s)
Versus
THE
REGIONAL PROVIDENT FUND COMMISSIONER & 1 - Respondent(s)
=========================================================
Appearance
:
MR
SP MAJMUDAR for
Petitioner(s) : 1,MR
VIMAL A PUROHIT for
Petitioner(s) : 1,
None
for Respondent(s) : 1 -
2.
=========================================================
CORAM
:
HONOURABLE
MR.JUSTICE H.K.RATHOD
Date
: 03/09/2007
ORAL
ORDER
1. Heard
learned advocate Mr.S.P.Majmudar for the petitioner.
2. The
grievance of the present petitioner is that petitioner has retired on
30.4.2006 but, retirement after completion of 38 years not paid to
the petitioner and that is how the present petition is filed.
3. In
view of the aforesaid facts, it is open for the petitioner to
approach the respondents by way of detailed representation claiming
the retirement benefits from the respondents, within a period of one
month from the date of receiving the copy of this order.
4. As
and when the respondents receive the copy of representation from the
petitioner, the respondents are directed to consider the
representation and examine it and pass appropriate reasoned order in
accordance with law, within a period of three month from the date of
receiving the copy of such representation from the petitioner and
communicate the decision to the petitioner.
5. It
is further directed to the respondents to consider the case of
petitioner for retirement benefit and pay the retirement benefit
which are being undisputed according to respondents and which are
legally due and payable to the petitioner as per Service Rules within
a period of 15 days from the date of receiving the copy of this
order.
6. In
view of the above observations and directions, present petition is
disposed of without expressing any opinion on merits. However, in
case if ultimate decision is adverse to the petitioner, it is open
for the petitioner to challenge the same before appropriate forum in
accordance with law. Direct service is permitted.
(H.K.RATHOD,
J)
(vipul)
Top