IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) FRIDAY, THE TWENTY SEVENTH DAY OF JUNE TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE L.NARASIMHA REDDY WRIT PETITION No. 26334 of 2007 Between: V.L.Narayana, S/o.Venkatchalam,APSRTC, APSRTC Wanaparthy Bus Depot, Mahabubnagar Dist, A.P ..... PETITIONER AND 1 The Depot Manager,A.P.S.R.T.C Wanaparthy Bus Depot,Mahabubnagar Dist 2 The Secretary APSRTC Employees Provident Fund Trust, Musheerabad,Hyd .....RESPONDENTS Petition under Article 226 of the constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the Affidavit filed herein the High Court will be pleased to issue a writ or order or direction more particularly one in the nature of writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the respondent No.1 herein in not paying the balance P.F. amount of petitioner's contribution share which was already paid by the respondent No.2 herein to Respondent No.1 herein as bad, arbitrary, illegal, unjust and unreasonable and consequently direct the respondents to pay the due P.F amounts with interest to the petitioner and to pass such and also to return the original certificate to the petitioner immediately. Counsel for the Petitioner: MR.P.VENKATESWAR RAO Counsel for the Respondents: SMT.B.G.UMA DEVI The Court made the following ORDER: The petitioner was employed as a Conductor in A.P.S.R.T.C. on 11.12.1970 and he was removed from service on disciplinary grounds on 30.07.1980. Though he was successful in an industrial dispute, wherein the order of removal was challenged, after several rounds of litigation, the order of removal stood upheld. The petitioner made a claim for payment of provident fund. This Court directed in one of the writ petitions filed by the petitioner that his contribution to provident fund be refunded, since it was found that he did not have the requisite service for being extended the benefit of provident fund. The petitioner was paid a sum of Rs.21,519/- by demand draft, dated 06.12.2001, by A.P.S.R.T.C. Employees Provident Fund Trust. On the same day, they issued a demand draft for a sum of Rs.22,777/- in favour of the Depot Manager, Wanaparthy towards the wages that were paid to the petitioner on the basis of the award. The petitioner challenges the action of the respondents. Another grievance is that he has not been returned the original certificates. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Standing Counsel for the respondents. It is not in dispute that the petitioner was paid a sum of Rs.22,777/-, as part of back wages on the strength of the award in I.D.No.68 of 1982. Once the award was set aside and thereafter the I.D. itself was dismissed after remand, the petitioner cannot retain the amount paid to him towards back wages. Therefore, the respondents are justified in adjusting the said amount from out of the petitioner’s contribution towards provident fund and no exception can be taken to the proceedings, dated 18.04.2004. Hence, the writ petition is dismissed. The other grievance of the petitioner is about return of the original certificates. Once the petitioner has ceased to be in the employment of the respondents, they cannot withhold the testimonials of the petitioner. Therefore, they are directed to return the original certificates of the petitioner, within a period of four weeks (4) from today. There shall be no order as to costs. _____________________ L.NARASIMHA REDDY, J Dt:27.06.2008 kdl ..... REGISTRAR // TRUE COPY // SECTION OFFICER To 1.2CCs to 2.2CD copies Form-NIC-OGS/WP{BMR}