- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC-D:527 WP No. 113106 of 2014 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, AT DHARWAD DATED THIS THE 19TH DAY OF JANUARY 2026 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MRS JUSTICE K.S.HEMALEKHA WRIT PETITION NO.113106 OF 2014 (S-RES) BETWEEN: S. SHESHU SHETTY AGE: MAJOR, OCC: NIL, R/O. "GOUTAM NILAYA", 11/A, GURUDEV NAGAR, RAJNAGAR, HUBLI-580032. …PETITIONER (BY SRI. VENKATARAO N.DESHMUKH, ADVOCATE FOR SRI. ARAVIND D.KULKARNI, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. THE SECRETARY STAFF PROVIDENT FUND SECTION, VIJAY BANK, HEAD OFFICE, BANGALORE-560001. 2. THE GENERAL MANAGER PERSONAL DEPARTMENT (IRD), VIJAY BANK, HEAD OFFICE, M.G.ROAD, TRINITY CIRCLE, BANGALORE-560001. 3. THE CHAIRMAN AND MANAGING DIRECTOR AND THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, MANJANNA E Digitally signed by MANJANNA E Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA DHARWAD BENCH Date: 2026.01.24 11:28:22 +0530 - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC-D:527 WP No. 113106 of 2014 VIJAY BANK, HEAD OFFICE, M.G.ROAD, TRINITY CIRCLE, BANGALORE-560001. 4. THE REGIONAL MANAGER VIJAY BANK, REGIONAL OFFICE, 1ST FLOOR, V.A.KALBURGI MANSION, LAMINGTON ROAD, HUBLI-580020. 5. THE BRANCH MANAGER VIJAY BANK, HULGUR BRANCH, (1090) HULGUR, HUBLI. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. MALLIKARJUN S.HIREMATH, ADV. FOR R3 TO R5; NOTICE TO R1 AND R2 ARE SERVED) THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO ISSUE A WRIT OF CERTIORARI OR ANY OTHER WRIT OR DIRECTION IN THE NATURE OF WRIT TO QUASH IMPUGNED ORDER NO.RO/HBL/ANR/13113/06, DATED 30.06.2006, PASSED BY THE 4TH RESPONDENT (ANNEXURE-A) AND PASS APPROPRIATE ORDERS BY ALLOWING THIS WRIT PETITION IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE AND ETC. THIS WRIT PETITION COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING IN ‘B’ GROUP THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: THE HON'BLE MRS JUSTICE K.S.HEMALEKHA - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC-D:527 WP No. 113106 of 2014 ORAL ORDER The petitioner has approached this Court seeking to quash the impugned order dated 30.06.2006 passed by respondent No.4 (Annexure-A), whereby respondent No.4 directed respondent No.5 to release a sum of Rs.1,16,759/- along with interest of Rs.2,175/- from the petitioner’s Provident Fund Account for adjustments towards the Payment Pending Investigation Account. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that pursuant to the impugned order, the said amount has already been withdrawn from the petitioner’s PF account and credited to the Payment Pending Investigation Account. It is contended that such adjustment is wholly impermissible in law and is in direct contravention of Section 10 of the Employees’ Provident Fund and Miscellaneous Provisions Act, 1952 (“the Act” for short) 3. Per contra, learned counsel appearing for the respondents sought to justify the impugned order and - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC-D:527 WP No. 113106 of 2014 submits that, no interference is warranted. It is further submitted that the petitioner has submitted a representation to the Vijaya Bank, which has since merged with the Bank of Baroda and therefore, the petitioner may submit a fresh representation to the Bank of Baroda. 4. This Court has carefully considered the rival submissions and perused the material on record. 5. Section 10(1) of the Act, reads thus. “10. Protection against attachment.—(1) The amount standing to the credit of any member in the Fund 2 [or of any exempted employee in a provident fund] shall not in any way be capable of being assigned or charged and shall not be liable to attachment under any decree or order of any court in respect of any debt or liability incurred by the member 2 [or the exempted employee], and neither the official assignee appointed under the Presidency-towns Insolvency Act, 1909 (3 of 1909), nor any receiver appointed under the Provincial Insolvency Act, 1920 (5 of 1920), shall be entitled to, or have any claim on, any such amount.” 6. The above provision clearly provide statutory protection to the amount standing to the credit of a - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC-D:527 WP No. 113106 of 2014 member in the PF fund and expressly prohibits assignment, charge or attachment of such amounts towards any debts or liability incurred by the employee. 7. In view of the mandatory nature of Section 10 of the Act, the action adjusting the PF amount towards the recovery of amount of Payment Pending Investigation Account is clearly sustainable in law and cannot be countenanced. 8. Having regard to the aforesaid statutory bar this Court is of the considered view that appropriate direction are required to be issued to ensure compliance with law and safeguard the petitioner’s statutory entitlement. For the foregoing reasons, this Court pass the following: ORDER i. The writ petition is disposed of. ii. Liberty is reserved to the petitioner to submit fresh representation to the Bank of - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC-D:527 WP No. 113106 of 2014 Baroda/Vijaya Bank within two weeks from the date of receipt of copy of this order. iii. The Bank of Baroda/Vijaya Bank shall consider the fresh representation along with the petitioner’s earlier representation dated 14.05.2014 (Annexure-C) seeking release of the provident fund adjusted towards the Payment Pending Investigation Account, strictly in accordance with Section 10 of the Act and shall release the amount so recovered within four weeks from the date of filing of fresh representation. iv. In the event of failure to release the amount within the stipulated period, the petitioner is entitled for interest at the rate of 18% per annum from the date of expiry of the said period till payment. Sd/- JUSTICE K.S.HEMALEKHA EM Ct:VH List No.: 1 Sl No.: 69