M S PADMARAJAIAH Vs. SECRETARY DEPARTMENT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioner is before this Court praying for the following relief : (i) to issue a writ of certiorari quashing the letter bearing No. 5b/5-2/dlgs/11 dated 9-11-2005 at Annexure-K; letter bearing No. 7/10/2005-NS. 11 dated 27-7-2005, Annexure-l and letter bearing No. Sup (2):95/2005-2006 dated 15-11-2005 at Annexure-M; and (ii) to direct the respondents-1 to 6 to accept a total sum of Rs. 1,00,000.00 in his Public Provident Fund (in short, 'ppf Account') No. 0154 at the post office of the 6th respondent during the financial year 2005-2006.

(2.) THE brief facts leading to the filing of this writ petition are as under: The petitioner who is a Senior Advocate of the Bar, holding a PPF Account No. 0154 (one of the specified Savings under Section 80-C of Income Tax Act) with the 6th respondent. Section 80-C of the Income-tax Act was amended by the Finance Act, 2005 increasing the permissible deduction from Rs. 70,000.00 to Rs. 1,00,000.00 for the financial year 2005-06 (commencing from 1-4-2005 to 31-3-2006 ). During the financial year 2005 - 06 the petitioner had deposited a sum of Rs. 40,000.00 in his PPF Account. Later on, he sent a cheque for Rs. 40,000.00 by way of second instalment towards PPF. But, the said 6th defendant refused to accept the second instalment- of Rs. 40,000.00 on the ground that the total deposit exceeds Rs. 70,000.00 in a year. Hence, the petitioner sent another cheque for a sum of Rs. 30,000.00 towards the PPf Account. He made a request to authorities concerned to permit him to deposit a maximum of Rs. 1,00,000.00 in his PPF A/c. , as per Finance Act, 2005, but in vain. The reply received by the petitioner from the respondents 5th, 3rd and 2nd are at Annexures-K, L and M, respectively. It is contended that the respondents-1 to 5 have no authority to reply as per the impugned communication contrary to the Income-tax Act. Therefore, the petitioner is before this Court praying for the reliefs as mentioned above.

(3.) LEARNED counsel for the respondents submitted that as per the PPF (Second Amendment) Scheme 2002 and paragraph 3 (which came into force on 15-11-2002) an individual may subscribe to Public Provident Fund any amount not less than Rs. 5007- and not more than Rs. 70,000.00 in the financial year and therefore the petitioner was not entitled for any relief as prayed for.