WIMCO UPPU THOZHILALAR SANGAM v. THE CENTRAL PROVIDENT FUND COMMISSIONER
WP(MD)/17203/2021 · 2025-03-10
Mummineni Sudheer Kumar
Transfer Petitionbody2025
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 144977 (MAD) · dailylaw.ai ]
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 144977 (MAD) · dailylaw.ai ]
Judgment text
Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.
W.P.(MD) No.17203 of 2021 BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED : 10.03.2025 CORAM:
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE MUMMINENI SUDHEER KUMAR W.P.(MD) No.17203 of 2021 1.Wimco Uppu Thozhilalar Sangam reg.No.167/TAJ rep.by its President Kadinelvayal Post Vedaranyam Taluk Nagapattinam District 2.A.Subbaiyan
... Petitioners -vs- 1.The Central Provident Fund Commissioner Employees Provident Fund Organisation Head Office Bhavishya Nidhi Bhawan 14-Bhikaji Cama Place New Delhi-110 066 2.The Regional Provident Fund Commissioner EPFO Sub-Regional Office Bhavishya Nidhi Bhavan NGO B Colony Perumalpuram Post Thirunelveli-627 007 ____________ p. 2 W.P.(MD) No.17203 of 2021 3.The Management of Gujarat Heavy Chemicals Ltd., Salt Factory Kadivelvayal Post Vedaranyam Taluk Nagapattinam District ... Respondents PRAYER: Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, to issue a writ of declaration declaring that the action of the second respondent and the officials in his office in rejecting and returning the applications forwarded by the third respondent in Form-10-D for sanction of pension to the retired employees, who are the retired employees of the Contractors of the third respondent and members of the first petitioner Union, on the ground that they have not rendered the minimum 10 years of service, by excluding the off- season period of every year as non-contributory period and refusing to sanction pension to them, based on the above reason and on the ground that they have sought for clarification from the first respoindent and on the ground that such clarification was yet to be given by the first respondent as illegal, arbitrary and unconstitutional and consequently direct the second respondent to accept the applications in Form-10-D of the retired employees and the employees, who have left the service of the Contractors of the third respondent Management and also from such employees in future and sanction pension, after calculating the eligible service in terms of the explanation to Para 9(a) of ____________ p. 3 W.P.(MD) No.17203 of 2021 the Employees' Pension Scheme, 1995, by taking actual service less than a year in each year of service as full year service and by not excluding the off- season period in each year for the reason of no remittance of PF contributions for the same, within a time stipulated by this Court.
For Petitioners : Mr.S.Arunachalam For Respondents : Mr.S.Murugan, CGC for R1 Mr.K.Muralisankar for R2 Mr.T.Ravichandran for R3 O R D E R Learned for the petitioners seeks permission of this Court to withdraw this writ petition and he has also made an endorsement to that effect. 2. In view of the same, this writ petition is dismissed as withdrawn. No costs. 10.03.2025 NCC : Yes / No Index : Yes / No Internet : Yes / No
krk ____________ p. 4 W.P.(MD) No.17203 of 2021 MUMMINENI SUDHEER KUMAR, J. krk W.P.(MD) No.17203 of 2021 10.03.2025 ____________