IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.20869 of 2010 ABDUL RAUF S/O LATE PALLU MIAN, RESIDENT OF VILLAGE GOVINDPUR, P.S. MAHUA, DISTRICT VAISHALI. ... ... PETITIONER. Versus 1. THE UNION OF INDIA THROUGH CHIEF PROVIDENT FUND COMMISSIONER, EMPLOYEES PROVIDENT FUND ORGANIZATION, MINISTRY OF LABOUR, BHAVISHYA NIDHI BHAVAN-14, BHIKAJEE CAMA PLACE, NEW DELHI. 2. THE ASSISTANT PROVIDENT FUND COMMISSIONER, EMPLOYEES PROVIDENT FUND ORGANIZATION, MINISTRY OF LABOUR, GOVT. OF INDIA, SUB-REGIONAL OFFICE, BARRACKPORE, 14/15, B.T. ROAD, 3RD FLOOR, 24 PARGANA (NORTH), TITAGARH, WEST BENGAL. 3. THE REGIONAL PROVIDENT FUND COMMISSIONER, EMPLOYEES PROVIDENT FUND ORGANIZATION, MINISTRY OF LABOUR, GOVT. OF INDIA, R.BLOCK, PATNA. 4. THE ASSISTANT PROVIDENT FUND COMMISSIONER, EMPLOYEES PROVIDENT FUND ORGANIZATION, MINISTRY OF LABOUR, GOVT. OF INDIA, NEW VAKALATNKHANA, MUZAFFARPUR. 5. THE GENERAL MANAGER, M/S SHRI GAURI SHANKER JUTE MILLS LTD., GHOSPARA SHYAMNAGAR (NORTH), 24-PARGANA, WEST BENGAL. 6. THE CHAIRMAN, BOARD OF TRUSTEES, M/S SHRI GAURI SHANKER JUTE MILLS LTD., GHOSPARA SHYAMNAGAR (NORTH), 24-PARGANA, WEST BENGAL. 7. THE MILL MANAGER, M/S SHRI GAURI SHANKER JUTE MILLS LTD., GHOSPARA SHYAMNAGAR (NORTH), 24-PARGANA, WEST BENGAL. ... ... RESPONDENTS. ----------- 4. 20.1.2011. Heard Shri Rajendra Kumar Jain, learned counsel for the petitioner and Shri R.S. Pradhan, learned counsel appearing on behalf of respondent nos.3 and 4. The petitioner, who retired from Gauri Shanker Jute Mills Ltd., Ghospara, Shyamnagar (North), 24-Pargana, West Bengal, has prayed for directing the respondents to make payment of E.P.F. amount. At the very outset, a preliminary objection was raised 2 by Shri R.S. Pradhan that present writ petition is not maintainable before this Court. Shri Jain, learned counsel for the petitioner, submits that in view of provisions contained in Article 226(2) of the Constitution of India as well as Section 19 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, the petitioner, being resident of Bihar, is entitled to maintain the present writ petition. Learned counsel also submits that almost in similar circumstance, this Court has entertained a writ petition i.e. C.W.J.C. No.615 of 2009 (Pradeep Kumar Sinha Vs. Union of India & Ors.) and as such it was submitted that this writ petition may be entertained by this Court. Besides hearing learned counsel for the parties, I have also perused the materials available on record. At the time of hearing, learned counsel for the petitioner candidly admitted that whatever contribution was made by the petitioner, was deposited in the office of Assistant Provident Fund Commissioner, Employees Provident Fund Organization, Ministry of Labour, Govt. of India, Sub-Regional Office, 3 Barrackpore, 14/15, B.T. Road, 3rd Floor, 24 Pargana (North), Titagarh, West Bengal. Even the petitioner has filed representations as well as got served legal notice to the office, which was situated in the West Bengal. Annexures 3 and 4 i.e. representation and legal notice were served to the office at West Bengal. Merely because of the fact that petitioner is resident of Bihar, he cannot claim that this writ Court can entertain the present writ petition. As per provision contained in Article 226(1) of the Constitution of India, the power is basically exercised within its territorial jurisdiction. So far as order passed in C.W.J.C. No.615 of 2009 (Pradeep Kumar Sinha Vs. Union of India & Ors.) is concerned, the court is of the opinion that no benefit can be given to the petitioner since it appears that said order was a consent order. In the present case, preliminary objection has also been raised. Similarly, since this Court is exercising its writ jurisdiction, the claim of petitioner that in view of Section 19 of the C.P.C., this writ petition may be maintained, is not sustainable in the eye of 4 N.H./ law. Accordingly, the present writ petition is dismissed, since it is not maintainable before this Court. However, if so advised, the petitioner is at liberty to approach the proper forum. The petition stands rejected on the ground of its maintainability. ( Rakesh Kumar,J.)