RAM KUMAR Vs. STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard learned counsel for petitioners, learned State Counsel for opposite party no.1 and Mr. N. C. Mehrotra, learned counsel for opposite parties 2 to 4.

(2.) Petition has been filed challenging orders dtd. 14/9/2021 and 18/12/2021 whereby payment of interest due upon petitioners' contribution to Provident Fund has been restricted to a period of one year only from the date of superannuation.

(3.) Learned counsel for petitioners has submitted that petitioners superannuated from service on 31/12/2015 and 30/9/2016 respectively whereafter in terms of Sec. 4 of Provident Funds Act, 1925(hereinafter referred to as the Act of 1925), it was incumbent upon the authorities concerned to have made payment along with due interest on the contribution under Provident Fund Scheme. It is submitted that impugned orders have placed reliance on Regulation 6(4) of Uttar Pradesh Rajya Krishi Utpadan Mandi Parishad Contributory Provident Fund Regulations, 1978 (hereinafter referred to as the Regulations of 1978) to restrict payment of interest on the aforesaid Scheme only for a period of one year. Learned counsel for petitioners has thereafter adverted to the fact that Regulation 6(4) of the Regulations of 1978 itself places reliance on Regulation 17 of the Regulations of 1978, which in turn places reliance on Sec. 4 of the Act of 1925.