IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE V.GIRI FRIDAY, THE 3RD APRIL 2009 / 13TH CHAITHRA 1931 OP.No. 1131 of 1996(I) ------------------------------- PETITIONER: ------------------- K.P. POLY, MANAGER, FEDERAL BANK LTD., HEAD OFFICE, ALUVA. BY MR. K.R.B.KAIMAL, SENIOR ADVOCATE, ADV. SMT. I.SHEELA DEVI. RESPONDENTS: ------------------------ 1. CENTRAL BOARD FOR EMPLOYEES PROVIDENT FUND, REPRESENTED BY CHIEF PROVIDENT FUND COMMISSIONER, NEW DELHI. 2. REGIONAL PROVIDENT FUND COMMISSIONER, KALOOR, COCHIN-17. 3. FEDERAL BANK LTD., REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, HEAD OFFICE, ALUVA. 4. UNION OF INDIA, REPRESENTED BY SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, DEPARTMENT OF LABOUR, NEW DELHI. R1,R2 & R4 BY MT. P. PARAMESWARAN NAIR, ASST. S.G, R3 BY ADV. MR.N.N.SUGUNAPALAN. THIS ORIGINAL PETITION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 03/04/2009,THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: O.P. NO. 1131/1996-I: APPENDIX PETITIONERS' EXHIBITS: EXT.P.1: COPY OF THE ORDER DTD. 07/09/92 ISSUED BY THE UNION GOVERNMENT. EXT.P.2: COPY OF THE STATEMENT SHOWING BALANCE AMOUNT PAYABLE BY RESPONDENTS 1 AND 2. RESPONDENTS' EXHIBITS: NIL. //TRUE COPY// P.S. TO JUDGE. Prv. V.GIRI, J ------------------- O.P.1131/1996 -------------------- Dated this the 3rd day of April, 2009 JUDGMENT Petitioner who was employed in the third respondent, bank, resigned therefrom, and joined another service. He was a member of the Employees Provident Fund when he was an employee of the third respondent. His grievance relates to the non disbursal of the entire amount due to the employees, by the provident fund commissioner. It seems that the writ petition has been pending on account of the pendency of another petition filed by the Bank challenging a notification extending the provisions of the Act to the 3rd respondent Bank. The said writ petition has been disposed of by a separate judgment. 2. In the circumstances, petitioner's grievance shall be looked into by respondents 1 and 2 and it is so assured by Mr.N.N.Sugunapalan, learned senior counsel for the respondents, and appropriate action O.P.1131/1996 2 may be taken and suitable reply may be given to the petitioner, within three months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. To enable respondents 1 and 2 to do so, petitioner shall produce a copy of the judgment along with a representation in this regard, before the second respondent. The original petition is disposed of as above. V.GIRI, Judge mrcs