Research › Search › Judgment

Allahabad High Court · body

2025 DAILYLAW 107559 (ALL)

SYED ZAKI HAIDER v. STATE OF U.P. AND 2 OTHERS

WRIC/38010/2024 · 2025-03-20

Prakash Padia

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:41509 Court No. - 33 Case :- WRIT - C No. - 38010 of 2024 Petitioner :- Syed Zaki Haider Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 2 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Zafar Ahmad Khan Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Jagdish Pathak Hon'ble Prakash Padia,J. 1. Heard Sri Z. A. Khan, learned counsel for the petitioner, learned Standing Counsel for the respondent no.1 and Sri Rahul Mishra, Advocate, holding brief of Sri Jagdish Pathak, learned counsel for the respondents no.2 & 3. 2. The petitioner has preferred present writ petition inter-alia with the following prayers :- "(A). Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus directing the respondent No.3 to consider and decide the claim of the petitioner, make payment of provident fund, pension etc. And other all dues contained as in the representation dated 9.10.2024 within stipulated time fixed by this Hon'ble Court. (As contained No.1 to the writ petition). (B). Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus commanding and directing the respondent No.3 to provides the benefits of Employees Provident Scheme as well as pension Scheme to the petitioner as per the Employees Provident Fund and Misc. Provision Act 1952 by depositing the balance/due amount of Employee and Employer Contribution along with interest in his UAN Account No.100377821258 (PPO No.55914)." 3. After some arguments counsel for the petitioner confined his prayer only in respect of pension. Pursuant to the order passed by this Court from time to time an order dated 17.01.2025 was passed by the Employees Provident Fund Organisation by which the monthly pension of the petitioner was fixed as Rs.2373/- per month. 4. In paragraph-9 of the supplementary affidavit filed by the petitioner it is stated that petitioner is entitled in the monthly pension for a sum of Rs.3214/- but wholly illegally the same has been calculated as Rs.2373/-. 5. In response to the supplementary affidavit, learned counsel for the respondents placed before this Court the instructions on the basis of which calculation has been made. 6. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record. 7. From perusal of the record, it transpires that pursuant to the order passed by this Court, pension has been fixed by the respondents at Rs.2373/- per month by order dated 17.01.2025. 8. In view of the same, in case petitioner is aggrieved against the fixation of the aforesaid pension, he is free to raise his objections before the authority concerned. In case such an objection is filed before the authority concerned, the authority concerned will consider and decide the same strictly in accordance with law. Order Date :- 21.3.2025 Pramod Tripathi Digitally signed by :- PRAMOD TRIPATHI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad Digitally signed by :- PRAMOD TRIPATHI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad