VIMALA DEVI Vs. EMPLOYEES PROVIDENT FUND

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard learned Counsel for the appellant/writ petitioner and learned Counsel for the respondent Nos. 1 & 2, the Employees Provident Fund through its Central Provident Fund Commissioner, New Delhi and Regional Provident Fund Commissioner, Mumbai.

(2.) It has been submitted on behalf of the appellant that in the writ proceeding respondent Nos. 1 & 2 had already appeared and filed their counter affidavit but still the writ Court preferred to dismiss the writ petition vide order under appeal dated 27.02.2009 on the ground that no cause of action had arisen within the territorial jurisdiction of this Court. Learned Counsel for the appellant did not dispute that the contribution towards provident fund deducted by the employer of appellants husband was from Patna Office and was being deposited with the Mumbai Office of the Provident Fund Commissioner, where the appellants husband was a registered subscriber. The Cause of action has been claimed to be within the jurisdiction of this Court on the ground that Regional Office of Press Trust of India, at Patna used to make the deduction towards Provident Fund from the salary of appellants husband and therefore part of cause of action should be treated to have arisen within the jurisdiction of this Court.

(3.) Learned Counsel for the appellant further submits that appellant is a widow of let Rajdeo Ram, a resident of Harizan Colony, P.S. Budha Colony, Patna and she has no means to pursue the litigation at Mumbai or Delhi and this Court should help her to get the proceeds of provident fund on account of death of her husband.