1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO. 10142 OF 2009 Shri Kachrulal S/o Digambar Chaudhari ... Petitioner Vs. The State of Maharashtra & Ors. ... Respondents None for the petitioner. Mr. C.R.Sonawane, Govt. Pleader, for respondent Nos. 1, 2 & 4. CORAM: F.I.REBELLO AND J.H.BHATIA, JJ. DATE : 10th December, 2009. P.C. 1. None present for the petitioner. 2. The grievance of the petitioner is that his Provident Fund dues have, till date, not been paid. According to the petitioner, his services came to be terminated on 30.8.2007 one day prior to his superannuation. He has challenged the dismissal order by preferring an appeal before the Competent Authority. That appeal is pending. 3. We are not concerned with that issue. The controversy is the non- 2 payment of Provident Fund dues of the petitioner. From the record, we find that correspondence has been exchanged. Since the petitioner would have in the normal course superannuated on 31.8.2007 and as more than two years have passed, in our opinion, the issue cannot be prolonged further. 4. In the light of that, the respondent No.4 is directed, within 12 weeks from today, to take steps. If the petitioner is entitled to provident fund dues, to get the provident fund dues released. If the respondent No.5 has not forwarded the necessary papers to respondent No.4, we direct the respondent No.5 to forward the papers to respondent No.4 to take steps including appointment of an Administrator for carrying out the said purpose. With the above observation, the petition is disposed of. (J.H.BHATIA,J.) (F.I.REBELLO,J.)