08.04.2026 Item no. 10 Court no. 30 g.b. 266012 WPA 3521 of 2026 Tapan Kumar Das Vs. Union of India & Ors. Mr. Goutam Roy Mr. Samya Ray …..For the Petitioner Mr. Somnath Roy Ms. Shreyasi Manna …… For the Respondent Nos. 5 & 6 Mr. Anil Kumar Gupta ….For the P. F. Authorities 1. The writ application has been preferred praying for direction upon the respondents to consider the representation dated 16.01.2026 submitted by the petitioner herein praying for benefit of higher pension scheme along with the arrears of higher pension with interest. 2. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that the issue in the present case and the scheme herein is not similar to the issue decided by this Court which is now pending before the Division Bench in appeal. 3. Learned counsel for the Provident Fund Authorities has raised the issue of maintainability on the ground of territorial jurisdiction. 4. Heard the learned counsels for the parties. 5. Learned counsel appearing for the respondent nos. 5 and 6 submits that the company has a local office in Kolkata and he shall provide details to the petitioner who is at liberty to add the said local company as respondent in the writ application. 6. Liberty is granted to add the said respondent in the cause title of the writ application. 7. As such it appears that the company herein has a local office and the document at page 32 shows that the Provident Fund Authority at Kolkata has issued the letter dated 02.09.2021 regarding disbursement of pension sanctioned to the petitioner under the E. P. S. Scheme, 1995. 8. It is further submitted that the petitioner herein was employed at the local office of the company in Kolkata. 9. Thus, considering the said fact and that the matter relates to pension and also relying upon the judgement of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Shanti Devi @ Shanti Mishra Vs. Union of India & Ors. passed in Civil Appeal No. 3630 of 2020 dated 05.11.2020, this Court is of the view that this Court has the territorial jurisdiction to hear the writ application and the same is maintainable. 10. Learned counsel appearing for the respondent nos. 5 and 6 submits that an order dated 30.07.2025 2 has been passed by the National Company Law Tribunal, Principal Bench, New Delhi in CP (IB) No, 404/(PB)/2024, wherefrom it appears that the matter is now before the Interim Resolution Professional. It is, thus, submitted that at present the petitioner has to make the said prayer before the said Interim Resolution Professional as appointed by NCLT, Delhi. 11. Considering the said fact, the writ application is disposed of with liberty granted to the petitioner to approach the Interim Resolution Professional for the relief claimed in the present writ application and the Interim Resolution Professional shall be at liberty to consider the prayer of the petitioner in accordance with law. 12. It is to be noted that this Court has not gone into the merit of the writ application. 13. Urgent photostat certified copy of this order, if applied for, be supplied to the parties on urgent basis after completion of all necessary formalities. ( Shampa Dutt (Paul), J.) 3