Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Chhattisgarh · body

2025 DAILYLAW 60992 (CHH)

BAL BIR GIRI v. STATE OF CHHATTISGARH

WPS/13669/2025 · 2025-12-10

Shri Narendra Kumar Vyas

Public Interest Litigationbody2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

2025:CGHC:60266 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPS No. 13669 of 2025 1 - Bal Bir Giri S/o Sri Mewa Giri Aged About 62 Years R/o Goswami Bhawan, Namankala Ambikapur, District Surguja C.G.- 497001. ... Petitioner(s) versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through Secretary, Department Of School Education Department, Indravati Bhawan, Nava Raipur, Atal Nagar, C.G. 492002. 2 - Secretary, Department Of School Education Department, Indravati Bhawan, Nava Raipur, Atal Nagar, C.G. 492002. 3 - Director, Department Of School Education Department, Pension Bada Road, Vivekanand Nagar, Tagore Nagar, Raipur C.G. 4 - Collector Cum Mission Director Samagra Shiksha (Pre), Ambikapur, District Surguja C.G. 5 - Regional Commissioner, Employees Provident Fund Organisation, Bhavishya Nidhi Bhawan, Indira Gandhi Commercial Complex, D- Block, Pandri Raipur C.G.- 492004. 6 - Regional Commissioner, Employees Provident Fund Organisation- Ii, Employees Provident Fund Office, Vidya Nagar, Bilaspur C.G.- 495004. ... Respondent(s) For Petitioner : Mr. Bidya Nand Mishra, Advocate For State : Mr. Kawaljeet Singh Saini, Panel Lawyer For R/4 : Mr. Animesh Tiwari, Advocate For R/5&6 : Mr. Sunil Pillai, Advocate KISHORE KUMAR DESHMUKH Digitally signed by KISHORE KUMAR DESHMUKH Date: 2025.12.11 18:52:13 +0530 Hon'ble Shri Justice Narendra Kumar Vyas Order on Board 11.12.2025 1. The present petition has been instituted by the petitioner seeking a direction for release of his Employees’ Provident Fund. 2. Let the petitioner submit a fresh application before the Employees’ Provident Fund Organisation claiming his EPF contribution in accordance with the provisions of the Employees’ Provident Funds and Miscellaneous Provisions Act, 1952. Upon such application being submitted, the respondents shall examine the claim and do the needful. 3. In view of the aforesaid direction, the writ petition (S) stands disposed of. Sd/-d- (Narendra Kumar Vyas) Judge kishore