Research › Search › Judgment

Madras High Court · body

2015 DIGILAW 925 (MAD)

M. Rajalakshmi v. Accountant General

2015-02-16

K.RAVICHANDRA BAABU

body2015
Judgment :- 1. The petitioner has filed this Writ Petition seeking for a direction to the respondents 3 and 4, to disburse the retirement benefits to the petitioner viz., General Provident Fund, Death-cum-Retirement Gratuity, Family Pension, Special Provident Fund, as sanctioned by the 1st respondent. 2. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that after filing this Writ Petition, the respondents have paid General Provident Fund, Death-cum-Retirement Gratuity, Family Pension to the petitioner and however, Special Provident Fund has not been sanctioned so far. He further submitted that even in respect of payment of General Provident Fund is concerned, there are some discrepancies with regard to such payment. Therefore, the petitioner may be permitted to make representation to the concerned authorities seeking for further payment of General Provident Fund. 3. Mr. S. Kumar, the learned Special Government Pleader appearing for the respondents 2 to 4 and Mr. P.Gunasekaran, the learned counsel appearing for the 1st respondent submitted that in so far as the payment of Special Provident Fund is concerned, the same shall be disbursed to the petitioner within a period of four weeks and in so far as the dispute with regard to payment made in General Provident Fund is concerned, the petitioner may be directed to make a representation to the concerned authorities. 4. Heard both sides. 5. The petitioner is aggrieved against the non-payment of the above retirement benefits and filed the above writ petition. It is now stated by the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner that except Special Provident Fund, all other amounts are paid and the petitioner is willing to make a representation in respect of disputed payment of General Provident Fund is concerned. Accordingly, this Writ Petition is disposed of as follows:- i. The respondents 2 and 4 are directed to pay the Special provident Fund to the petitioner, as sanctioned by the 1st respondent, within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. ii. In so far as the dispute raised by the petitioner in respect of payment made in General Provident Fund is concerned, it is open to the petitioner to make representation before the appropriate authorities and if any such representation is made, it is for the said authorities to consider and decide the same on merits and in accordance with law. No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed.