SL. No Date Office Notes, reports, orders or proceedings or directions and Registrar’s order with Signatures COURT’S OR JUDGES’S ORDERS D1- 16 WPMS No.2157 of 2025 Hon’ble Ravindra Maithani, J. Mr. Rajendra Dobhal, Senior Advocate assisted by Mr. Prince Chauhan, Advocate for the petitioners. Mr. Suyash Pant, Standing Counsel for the State. Mr. Rajesh Sharma, Advocate for the respondent no.4. Mr. N.S. Pundir, Advocate for the respondent no.2. By means of the instant petition, the petitioner seeks the following reliefs:- i. To issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus directing the respondent nos. 2 and 3 to take immediate and necessary action by uploading the joint option for past service records of the petitioners rendered prior to 01.03.2002 in the records of the State Seed and Organic Production Certification Agency. So that the petitioners could get their rightful benefits under the Employees’ Pension Scheme, 1995. ii. To issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of Mandamus, directing respondent nos. 2 and 3 to consider and decide the representations submitted by the petitioners (Annexure No.-6 and 7), in accordance with law, within a stipulated time frame which deems fit and proper in the present circumstances of the case. iii. To issue any suitable writ, as may be fixed by this Hon’ble Court order or direction, which this Hon’ble Court may deem fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case. iv. To award the cost of the writ petition in favour of the petitioners. Heard. Learned Senior Counsel appearing for the petitioners submits that petitioners had been contributing under the Employee Provident Fund Scheme under the Employee Provident Fund and Miscellaneous Act, 1952; they also opted for higher pension, in view of the provisions of Employee Pension Scheme, 1995, but they are not being paid higher pension on the ground that services rendered by the petitioners prior to 01.03.2002, have not been uploaded on the portal. He further submits that the petitioners may be given liberty to make a fresh representation to the respondents-authority with the directions to the respondents-authority to decide the representation within a stipulated time. Learned counsel for the respondents no.4 submits that in case the petitioners give a fresh representation, it shall be decided within a period of four weeks from the date of its receipt. The Court takes on record the statement given by learned counsel for the respondent no.4. The writ petition is disposed of with the liberty to the petitioners to move a fresh representation to the respondents authorities within a week. The respondents authorities are further directed to take a decision on such representation within a period of four weeks, thereafter, in accordance with law. (Ravindra Maithani J.) 21.07.2025 RV