Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
N.NAGARESH, J
SUKUMARAN.A – Appellant
Versus
MANAGING DIRECTOR REPRESENTING THE KERALA STATE ROAD TRANSPORT CORPORATION – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. non-payment of provident fund (Para 1 , 2) |
| 2. employer's explanation for withholding payment (Para 3) |
| 3. court's directive on fund payments (Para 4 , 5) |
J U D G M E N T
Dated this the 21st day of November, 2025 The petitioners are retired employees of KSRTC.
They are before this Court alleging that the Provident Fund amounts due to them have not been paid.
2. Relying on the judgments in Soman v.
KSRTC [(2005) 2 ILR (Ker) 556] and Sharmathali P.K and others v. KSRTC (W.P.(C) No.24403 of 2023), the petitioners contended that the Provident Fund is a fund constituted by the contributions made by the employee alone and the employer is only a custodian of the fund. Therefore, withholding of Provident Fund is highly arbitrary and illegal.
3. Standing Counsel entered on behalf of the respondents and resisted the writ petition. A counter affidavit has been filed on behalf of the respondents. It is submitted that KSRTC is facing severe financial crisis and is finding it difficult to honour the salary bills of the serving employees. KSRTC has taken steps to generate more revenue and disburse the terminal benefits due to its employees. The petitioners' applications for payment of
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
