THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE NOOTY RAMAMOHANA RAO W.P.No. 29611 OF 2010 ORDER: This writ petition has been filed by a former Mechanical Chargemen of the Andhra Pradesh State Road Transport Corporation (for short `APSRTC’) seeking directions to the respondents to settle the balance provident fund dues with interest to him at the earliest. The learned Standing Counsel for the APSRTC Sri K.Satyanarayana Murthy has filed a counter affidavit sworn to by the Law Officer on behalf of the Corporation wherein the facts relating to the service particulars of the writ petitioner were admitted. It was stated that the writ petitioner retired from service on 30.6.1998 as a Mechanical Chargemen. It was further pointed out that when he approached the Labour Court, Guntur by instituting MP No. 293 of 1999 claiming Provident Fund dues for the period from April, 1998, May, 1998 and June, 1998, an amount of Rs.41,353/- was paid to the petitioner including the interest payable as up to 30th September 2007. The amount was paid through a demand draft bearing No. 314403, dated 27.9.2007. In paragraph (7) of the said counter affidavit, it is stated that a total amount of Rs. 1,84,572/- which was due and payable to the petitioner has been ordered to be paid to the petitioner immediately. A cheque was also drawn for the said amount of Rs.1,84,572/- and the same was forwarded to the Depot Manager, Guntur-I for payment. Learned counsel for the writ petitioner Sri Pitchaiah seeks further time to enable the writ petitioner to actually receive the said cheque and encash it. I have no doubt in my mind that adequate balance would lie in the account of the bank of the APSRTC over which this cheque for Rs.1,84,572/- must have been drawn and I am also equally confident that the 2nd respondent will forth with issue the cheque to the writ petitioner without causing any difficulty or harassment to him, as the writ petitioner is already 70 year old man and what is now being given by the APSRTC is the amount which is otherwise legitimate and due long years ago. Therefore, the writ petition is disposed of observing that no further orders are needed to be passed. But, however, liberty is always reserved to the writ petitioner to submit a detailed representation to the respondents by Regd. Post in case the calculations made by him are at variance and disclose his entitlement for any additional sum than what has already been calculated and paid. I hope and trust that in future no such case would crop up for consideration of this court. --------------------------------- Nooty Ramamohana Rao, J Knk 14th March 2011