(’gl PETITIONER RESPONDENTS Z}? IN THE HON’BLE HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WRIT PETITION ( s ) No. / 2009 : HARI NARAYAN MISHRA S/o Late Shri Matabhik Mishra Aged about 48 Years, Employed as Manager, Jindal Institute of Technology and Skills, Raigarh, Residing at : NE—67, Hill View Colony, Kharsia Road, RAIGARH [C.G.] VERSUS UNION OF INDIA Through : The Secretary, Ministry of Labour, Shrarn Mantralaya, NEW DELHI REGIONA PROVIDENT FUND COMMISSION, Through : The Commissioner, Regional Provident Fund Commission, 9th Floor, Mayur Bhawan, Cann'aught Circus, NEWDELHI —1 The Commissioner, Regional Provident Fund Commission, (EPF Organisation) D-Block, Scheme No. 32, Indira Gandhi Commercial Complex, Pandri, RAIPUR — 492001 (CG) EMPLOYEE’S P. F . ORGANISATION, Through : The Assistant PF Commissioner, Employees Provident Fund Organisation RegiOnal Offlce, Delhi-North, BhaVishya Nidhi Bhawan, 28 Community Centre, Wazirpur Industrial Area, NEW DELHI—52 The Assistant P.F.Commissi0ner, Employees Provident Fund Organisation Sub—Regional Office, 132, Zon-II, M.P.Nagar, BHOPAL - 462011 DAYANAND ANGLO VEDIC COLLEGE TRUST AND MANAGING SOCIETY, Through : The Director, Dayanand Anglo Vedic College Trust & Managing Society. Chitragupta Road, Paharganj, NEW DELHI — 110005 / L HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH z BILASPUR Writ Petition (S) N0. 864 of 2009 Petitioner Han' Narayan Mishra Versu$ Respondents Union of India 8a otherS WRIT PETITON UNDER ARTICLE 226/227 OFTHE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA. (SB: Hon’ble Shri Satish K‘ Agniho’m' J.) Shm' B. P. Rae, Advocata for tha petitionsr. M$ Fouzia Mirza, Assistant SoHcitor Gsneral far the respondent No.1. Shri Pradoep Saxena, Advocate for the raspondent No 3 Shri Malay Shn'vastava, Advocate for tho resooncient No.5. o R D E R gown Heard. (Passsd on this 29¢ day of Janumy, 2010) The ps’riiioner has preferTed this petition being aggrieved by the action of the respondents/authorities that they have not traasfen‘ed his pensionable Service and relevant records to the respondent No.3 Where his Pension‘Account No. CG] 18296/001 is maintained. 2. Shri Pradeep Saxena, learned counsel appearing for the respondent No.3 submits that the petitioner is required to make an application through his present employer and thereafter his past pension seniority would be transferred. Even otherwise, the pension seniority is to be granted on account of number of years put in service, not on the basis of the date of submission of the application, in accordance with Clause 57 of the Employees’ Provident Funds Scheme, 1952. OJ Fa Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has already made an application before the respondent No.6. 4. in View of the foregoing this petition stands disposed of with a direction to the concerned authority to process the application of the petitioner and take necessary steps so that the pension seniority of the petitioner is transferred. No order asto costs. Sd/— Satish K. Agnihotri Judge