- A IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AMAR, (Special Original Jurisdiction) WEDNESDAY, THE SEVENTH DAY OF MAY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA WRIT PETITION NO: 19811 OF 2019 Between: R Prasad Rao, S/o. Malakondraidu Aged 66 years, R/o. 10-38-8, Janatha Pet (North 1st Lane) Kavali, Nellore District - 524201. ...Petitioner AND 1. Employees Provident Fund Organization, Bhavishya Nidhi Bhavan 14, Bhikaji Cama Place, New Delhi - 110066 Rep. by its Commissioner 2. Regional Provident Fund Organization Regional Office, Bhavishyanidhi Bhavan, Krishna Nagar, 3rd Lane, Guntur, Andhra Pradesh 3. Assistant Provident Fund Commissioner (Pension) EPFO, Regional Office, Kadapa ...Respondents Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may be pleased to issue a Writ, Order or Direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the respondents in issuing proceedings vide AP/RO/CDP/Pension (Special Cell)/2019/1498 dated 15.11.2019 by suo-moto undertaking revision of the pension payable to me to lower stage restoring my old monthly pension at Rs.2085/- per month instead of the revised higher pension of Rs.8187/- per month as 7 being illegal, arbitrary, highhanded and violative of Articles of the Constitution of India apart from being violative of principles of natural justice and consequently issue an order holding that the Petitioner is entitled for payment of higher pension from November 2019 onwards without any deductions. 14, 16 and 21 lA NO: 1 OF 2019 Petition under Section 151 CPC stated in the affidavit filed i praying that in the circumstances in support of the petition, the High Court may be to pay the revised pension onwards every month by suspending the impugned proceedings vide AP/RO/CDP/Pension Cell)/2019/1498 dated 15.11.2019 issued by the 3rd Respondent. pleased to direct the respondents to continue without any deductions from November 2019 (Special Counsel for the Petitioner: SRI. VENKAT CHALLA Counsel for the Respondents: SRI T BALAJI(SC FOR EPFO) The Court made the following order: 1 APHC010412352019 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3396] WEDNESDAY, THE SEVENTH DAY OF MAY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE VENKATA JYOTHIRMAI PRATAPA WRIT PETITION NO: 19811/2019 Between: R. Prasad Rao ...PETITIONER AND Employees Provident Fund Organization and Others ...RESPONDENT(S) Counsel for the Petitioner: 1.VENKAT CHALLA Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1.T BALAJI(SC FOR EPFO) The Court made the following ORDER: This Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of Constitution of India with \ the following prayer for: “...to issue a Writ Order or Direction more particuiarly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the respondents in issuing proceedings vide AP/RO/CDP/Pension Special Cell/2019/1498 dated 15.11.2019 by suomoto undertaking revision of the pension payable to me to iov/er stage restoring my old monthly pension at Rs. 2085/- per month instead of the revised higher pension of Rs.8187/- per month as being illegal arbitrary highhanded and violative of Articles 14 16 and 21 of the Constitution of India apart from being violative of principles of natural justice and consequently issue an order holding that the Petitioner is entitled for payment of higher pension from November 2019 onwards without any deductions and pass... ” 2 2. Heard Sri Venkat Challa, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri ^ T.Balaji, learned Standing Counsel for EPFO for the respondents. 3. When the matter is taken up for hearing, learned Standing Counsel for EPFO would submit that in the light of the Judgment of Hon’ble Supreme Court in Employees Provident Fund Organization and Ors. Vs.Sunil Kumar B. and Ors^ at paragraph No. 44, the petitioner is not entitled for higher pension, since he retired prior to 01.09.2014. 4. Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that recording the same, the petition may be disposed giving liberty to the petitioner to challenge any recovery proceedings if they are initiated. 5. Recording the above said submissions, the Writ Petition is disposed of. However, in case, any recovery proceedings are initiated by the respondent- authorities, the petitioner is at liberty to challenge the same. Pending applications, if any, shall stand closed. air 2022 SC 5634 officer //true copy// SECTlO To, Provident Fund Organization, New Delhi - 110066 1. The Commissioner, Employees Nidhi Bhavan 14, Bhikaji Cama Place Bhavishya 2 Regional Provident Fund Organization Regional Offrce, Bhavisdyanidhi , Krishna Nagar, 3rd Lane, Guntur, Andhra Pradesh Bhavan 3, The Assistant Provident Fund Commissioner (Pension) EPFO, Regional Office, Kadapa. i Venkat Challa Advocate [OPUC] nn .Qri One CC to Sri. T Balaji(SC for EPFO) [OPUC] 5. 6. Three CD Copies GSC t , ^ HIGH COURT DATED:07/05/2025 ORDER WP.No.19811 of 2019 DISPOSING THE WP WITHOUT COSTS