IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) THURSDAY, THE THIRTIETH DAY OF JUNE TWO THOUSAND AND FIVE PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE S.ANANDA REDDY WRIT PETITION NO: 13974 of 2005 Between: 1 P. Vittal Reddy S/o. Hanumantha Reddy R/o. 1/85/3, Bhavani Nagar Nacharam R.R.District. 2 B. Anandam S/o. Ankaiah R/o. 12-14-450, Ambedkar Nagar Isakabavi, Moulali Hyderabad. 3 E. Venkata Swamy S/o. Ramabrahmam R/o.20-35/15, Chilkanagar Uppal R.R.Dist. 4 G. Venugopal S/o. Gowri Naidu R/o.4-7-7/33, Near Wesley School Raghavendra Nagar Nacharam R.R.Dist. 5 B. Narayana Rao S/o. Appayya R/o. 22-2-1075/13/C, Bagh Amberpet Hyderabad. 6 K. Mahendra S/o. Siddaiah R/o. 2-21-158, Chilakanagar Uppal R.R.Dist. ..... PETITIONERS AND 1 The Regional Provident Fund Commissioner, Barkatpura, Hyderabad. 2 The Assistant Commissioner, Provident Fund, Barkatpura, Hyderabad. .....RESPONDENTS Petition under Article 226 of the constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the Affidavit filed herein the High Court may be pleased to issue a writ, order or direction more particularly one in the nature of writ of Mandamus, to declare the action of the respondents in not considering the representation dt.12-4-2005 submitted by the petitioners, seeking to settle the amounts pertaining to the provident fund of the petitioners as arbitrary, illegal, unjust and consequently direct the respondents herein to forthwith pass appropriate orders and to pay the provident fund amounts to the petitioners herein. Counsel for the Petitioner: MR.LINGESWARA RAO PANDRANKI Counsel for the Respondents: MS.KAVITHA YADAV, SC The Court at the stage of admission made the following: ORDER: This writ petition is filed by the petitioners seeking writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the respondents in not disposing of the representation dated 12-04-2005 seeking to settle the amounts pertaining to the Provident Fund dues to the petitioner, as illegal and arbitrary, and consequently, direct the respondents to pass appropriate orders and to pay the amounts due to them. 2 . According to the petitioners, they were employed in Stallion Tyres Limited, which went into liquidation and was closed during the year 1997. As a result of which, the petitioners were removed from service. Subsequently, in the year 2000, though the said Company was revived, fresh employees were engaged, ignoring the petitioners. However, as they are entitled for Provident Fund amounts for the period from 1984 to 1997 i.e., the period during which they were engaged as workers in the above referred Company, they made a representation to the respondents for settling the Provident Fund dues to them, but the respondents did not pass any orders. Therefore, the present writ petition. 3. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned Standing Counsel for the respondents. 4. As the representation of the petitioners for settlement of the Provident Fund dues to the petitioners was not considered and disposed of, the writ petition is disposed of directing the respondents to pass appropriate orders within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order, and finally, if the petitioners are entitled for any payment under the orders of the respondents, the said amount is also directed to be paid immediately thereafter. 5. The writ petition is accordingly disposed of. No order as to costs. __________________ S.ANANDA REDDY, J 30th June, 2005 SKM To 1 The Executive Officer, Tirumala Tirupathi Devasthanams, Tirumala, Tirupathi, Chittoor District. 2 The Joint Executive Officer ( I/C CF), Tirumala Tirupathi Devasthanam, Tirumala, Tirupathi, Chittoor District. 3 The Divisional Forest Officer, Tirumala Tirupathi Devasthanam, Tirumala, Tirupathi, Chittoor District. 4 Two CD copies Form-NIC-OGS/WP{CHP}