Andhra Pradesh High Court - Amravati
Kanuri Rama Seshayya vs Employees Provident Fund ... on 24 June, 2020
Author: Ninala Jayasurya
Bench: Ninala Jayasurya
IN THE NIGH COURT OF ANOHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATL-~
(SPECIAL ORIGINAL JURISDICTION)
°
x
5 ,
Be be ; BO Boe Oo we Be GP apg Deven ee te Bere ee
ee B BRE8e we Ee s g EZR EG me ie &
i F ¢ Be ag BID GT oe a eo BEBE od .
i 3 Se taer a Chee ene, hee EN Meee yey FR ES $3 ot oO, iB
gu 2 2 2 6 oc ¥ Be BEB Be BBB ae ge ie te sg =
wo a SG ® c gm Ree Ee a ae Be & em
i a oe ee oS Es vt Oe oe a ane @ ty thee oh. wf Ee, Pom
eo hei ge ie OS vie SR hh. C3 fe Be Bete ew Bo ~, @ me "ES
us ke ie &% 6#3 = cy ou ee te Race oe - ig waned ay ey ga fo mh 4 pe sy
Fs MA a oe x £ $ whee, fire tn, COTS £85 rh 1 ee. i ieee, howe *, ', a q
ae : ££} 2S & oy ye CO ee BD Bm 6G BR
s, as rn oc <i a a Of PS 2G? 4 OE OS oh
j Pg - ~ wl be we te Bs *, we oy Tae "6 Jb 2 # ES BK be ays ee
" bead . "pe OD ; : ee ee ge ae 1 oO cee Sy gy Pe Oe ma i me
: x ee ¢€8 B82 | | S82258 238 Sears -BE 3
Zz ie we Ce ee pe ee Ry ee Sab ES A bon @ &. 5 ee & ie "
tn Log o "L% fon OH a, CoS "ee Cy a Oe oe mS 3 TM ee Saw
3 nok tet oe A ie. = aw Fy ae Yoon ie aA a Me we we op, i om
ro 3 & C% ot Se Oe ties "Ge ad ay SS beh ae a cS a ae 9% icf
% £39 oe A pp ey, Or Ae ie ee SB ee SS ee et ie
me xg eo He ey, 2H ° Ge ee UD a oe
ae "pen Bm Ee fe 0% ie be he op RS hy hh. ae OF ia
if ~ a on g oF kee A fn fe" BY me SF Gh ws Lan . OB .
a 23 Bea o GE BT BOG eee oe gy 2 & Se 4
Shen a a ot if we ee ee ae OR me Be Fath = s
"fe Sd Raed Lae en toot ee bee i TO gg oe "sh gone GA Fond wy oe
Se fia 7 we ee ~ = "eee eS a ey Ee ny Fe i be nm ao
£5 oe OM ae te ey ie Op £ RY Boe oe 2 o. ms 2
ree ani bbe. ~ OR ode i, mie ie, UB ee a & fy go Ba ae pee a he bor beh
vy ESE : heat is aR ty a gr bee oe EL . a3 oe
gin bd wg ae se oD ge we ge Be a ve ae THB ; te en
be zo Gf GG RE & i BE Eure @ 2 £
r 5 a aS fy wy es, A te, ER. at Noe
re ot ne epee ~ " " ", oF ES S, hi 8 As SO craw eee 3
The Bean wen . th, . tod ae ee ' . i &> @ heh GL Magee mapa we
eg Bone a GG hee on ft. £5 fi & B My ee xe het 57
Be 2 om & @ & CE we % (Bae Be # @ &€
ad oe fom a & 8 a ak a Rey oe / te
aa rn" a re ig S ee Besa an: w eg Cnty, C4 SS foe %é
om i oe § B= obi -& BE pas BPRS Z
be et woe ~ a" Ree ee" bo e
Zt yp me ge bok os fee gy ye aed See in
a anne te ed ty ee ae yo Be ee a oe ft.
Be pe ye pe 3 oe fe Z chy on ke 3 os
me eg oo = Be 3 cy be
eo eS a 2 a 5 Re oe ie & g :
hoon 9 j agg ge EM pe - Sagan ge 4 th Z Siow e
3 ae; Bp os ae Bete SB a ke EB eg Py Be , se
ih - "3 . a OR gs ¢ thee 4 ° gene Inge % wt Heese ne eke 2
a oD. £25 bn £3 ea 'ae & f be $s ay Ee HE od sie
: hes cued RES 5 on CY ad tie eg 7 Bs "£4 PO Bey os @ 3
ro Be ul ga e. ss eB ES OG g
ny Ny a brow Fae Ts et me eee Set Q eb oe " Pi, Meee api od a,
we , im i" ee ' to te we poe EE PED at %
ae & ie Sete a & we wi OT Bf o oy a ie
Se Yon an io A 3 ae tty €3 we . as See
tf <i, itt oe Cet hob Lae mane oe walk Bok tee RT gis. z
a we % ee et Mays ped, oe shee &
a o ® &E bay § 2S Zee SB Gok e . a
ay a e ra as "x SBE "B, es ey i pe aif, tet "SS wt
2 ey ee 6° E a OeoB . "ay 2 ee
"4 4 " 4 yo hee ee eS oO tee 4 heat wanhe OSE
oo x OS Ae ee ~ B& a a a Be z
ib i re te HEE eS * tS Ey Ben Ge oy og ied
ee i hee eee he RR te 0% ware. iin eur Ce SEF mo ce ad a fy @ 8
Coe Hi ths ee RE LP an: Oy yj a at re KEG SB wow ;
a on thy a> ty *F coed Siege $e om ry 3
"a 3 o, OD oe a ta ee a OG ey we yee ogee oe
few re. ae Ze i Cy | oo BS ow Se Bt . be
te OF th ee OE = oe MO Ee @ Ea
3 ie vg, ED 2 GS 4, ie "oy ge te B 3 oy 7 ve eos
ee pe BS eB Gh OP Be 2s £o =
4B kee Ke ao as Oe gel SO Oe BS OF Jeo a
ten the EO wo EL &. iy 1, z : . & rg & re
davit f
3
0
eepondenis.
&
ORDER:
re Os "e% me OB 6x3 he eh me Behvean:
4 2R g +h iar IANO 8 al orders in WOE Nos. 1414 of 2020 and 8405 of O80 ete.
Learned counsel for the respondents submits that the matter is seized of by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in a batch of cases with regard to payment of higher pension. However, no details have been furnished.
In view of the submissions made by the petitioner, this Court is of the opinion that the petitioner is entitled for interim direction as prayed for. However, the respondents are at liberty to place appropriate facts and issues for consideration by way of counter affidavit and seek modification of order thereafter.
List the matter after four (04) weeks for filing counter affidavit.
There shall be interim direction as prayed for." ~~ | SD/- M. RAMESH BABU ASSISTANT REGIST RAR.
TRUE COPY! ie :
For ASSISTANT REGISTRAR To,
4. The Commissioner, Employees Provident Fund Organisation, Bhavishya Nidhi Bhawan, 14, Bhikaji Cama Place, New Delhi- 110 066. 7 ~~
2. Regional Commissioner (EPF), Employees Provident Fund Organisation, _---- Regional Office, Adjacent Street to LIC Office, Near Marampudi Junction, Opp.Rythu Bazaar, Rajahmundry - 533 107.
3. Assistant Provident Fund Commissioner (Pension), Regional Office, Adjacent ~~ Street to LIC Office, Near Marampudi Junction, Opp.Rythu Bazaar, Rajahmundry- 533 107. ( Address Nos 1 to 3 by RPAD) One CC to Sri. Challa Gunaranjan Advocate [OPUC] -
One CC to Sri. T Balaji (SC for EPFO) Advocate [OPUC])_""
One spare copy.
our MSB HIGH COURT NUS.
DATED: 24/OG 2020 POST AFTER FOUR WEEKS CRDER WP.No TO8ST of 2080 INTERIM DIRECTION