SEEMA Vs. MAHARISHI MARKANDESHWAR UNIVERSITY, MULLANA, DISTRICT AMBALA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Learned senior counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner argues that benefit of contributory provident fund has not been paid to the petitioner in accordance with the provisions of the Employees' Provident Fund and Miscellaneous Provisions Act, 1952 as the deductions were being done from the salary of the petitioner, as an employee's share, but the employer's share was not deposited by the respondents with the authorities. Further grievance being raised on behalf of the petitioner is that even the leave encashment has wrongly been calculated by the respondents and the actual leave encashment for a period of 220 days has not been extended to the petitioner and further even the gratuity has not been paid at all by the respondents, whereas the petitioner is entitled for the gratuity for the period, when she worked with the respondents starting from the year 1996 till 2016.

(2.) The prayer of the petitioner is for directing the respondents to grant the benefits in respect of the contributory provident fund, leave encashment and gratuity for the service, which the petitioner rendered from 01.03.1996 till 31.10.2016 forthwith.

(3.) Learned senior counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner submits that petitioner has submitted a representation dated 20.04.2018 (Annexure P-4) and reminders of the said representation were also given but no action has been taken by the respondents so far and the said representation is still pending consideration with the respondents and the petitioner will be satisfied at this stage, in case a time bound direction is issued to respondent No. 2 to decide the representation in a time bound manner.