IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD THURSDAY THE FIFTEENTH DAY OF DECEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND ELEVEN PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE G. CHANDRAIAH WRIT PETITION NO. 32702 OF 2011 Between: A. Sadasiva Rao … Petitioner V/s. The Regional Provident Fund Commissioner Employees Provident Fund Organization Hyderabad & Ors. … Respondents Counsel for the Petitioner : Sri A.G. Satyanarayana Rao Counsel for the Respondents : Sri RN Reddy for R1 & R2 Sri K. Madhava Reddy SC for R-3 The Court made the following: (Order follows next page) THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE G. CHANDRAIAH WRIT PETITION NO. 32702 OF 2011 O R D E R : Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner, Sri RN Reddy, learned standing counsel for respondents 1 and 2 and Sri K.Madhav Reddy, learned standing counsel for respondent No.3. 2. This writ petition is filed by the petitioner seeking for issuance of writ of mandamus, declaring the action of the respondents in not considering the representations of the petitioner dated 24-5-2008, 28-6- 2008, 28-8-2008, 19-9-2008, 07-11-2008 and 17-1-2009 to permit higher option exercised by the petitioner in the year 2004 for remittance of 8.33% of employer contribution of the Provident Fund calculated on the salary beyond Rs.6500/- (Pay and DA) with effect from 16-11-1995 to the Provident Fund is arbitrary, contrary to Employees Pension Scheme 1995 and violative of Article 14 and 21 of the Constitution of India and consequently to direct the respondents to accept the higher option exercised by the petitioner for remittance of 8.33% of the employer’s contribution of the Provident Fund on the higher salary of the petitioner beyond Rs.6500/- (Pay and DA) w.e.f. 16-11-1995 to the pension fund so that the petitioner become eligible for higher pension as retirement and to pass such other suitable orders as this court may deem fit and proper in the circumstances of the case. 3. The case of the petitioner is that he was initially appointed in the Corporation on 17-2-1978 as Officer under Trainee and he was appointed as Assistant Traffic Manager on 17-2-1979 and thereafter he was promoted as Senior Scale Officer, Head of Department and now working as Executive Director. It is stated that the petitioner was appointed after 01-3- 1971 and a member of Provident Fund with PF A/c.No. AP-295/73249, therefore, the petitioner automatically becomes member of Family Pension Scheme, 1971 on his appointment. Consequent on introduction of Employees Pension Scheme 1995, the said scheme was made applicable to the employees, who are members of Employees Family Pension Scheme 1971 w.e.f. 16-11-1995. 4. It is further stated that as the higher option exercised by some of the colleague officers was acted upon by the respondents, the petitioner submitted a detailed representation dated 24-5-2008 to the first respondent to accept the higher option exercised by the petitioner in the year 2004 and to permit the fourth respondent to remit 8.33% of employer’s contribution to the pension fund. Though the said representation was received by the first respondent on 28-5-2008 but no action was taken. Therefore, the present writ petition is filed. 5. The learned standing counsel for respondents 1 and 2 and the learned standing counsel for Respondents 3 and 4 - APSRTC have submitted that in similar circumstances, this Court passed order dated 11- 10-2011 in WP.No. 27757 of 2011. Therefore, the respondents 1 and 2 may be directed to dispose of the representation dated 17-1-2009 filed by the petitioner. 6. Having regard to the facts and circumstances and the submissions made by both the counsel and also following the order dated 11-10-2011 passed by this Court in WP.No. 27757 of 2011, the respondents 1 and 2 are directed to consider and dispose of the representation dated 17-1-2009 submitted by the petitioner and pass appropriate order on the said representation within a period of six weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. The petitioner shall enclose a copy of the representation along with a copy of this order and submit the same to the respondents. 7. With the above direction, the writ petition is disposed of at the stage of admission. No costs. ------------------------------------- JUSTICE G. CHANDRAIAH. 15-12-2011 I s L THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE G. CHANDRAIAH WRIT PETITION NO. 32702 OF 2011 Circulation No.260 Date:15-12-2011 Court Master: I s L Computer No.43