Back
HIGH COURT OF MADRAS
MUMMINENI SUDHEER KUMAR, J
P.Mani @ Gopalakrishnan – Appellant
Versus
The Commissioner Employees Provident Funds Office – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. writ petition for name change in records. (Para 1 , 2 , 3) |
| 2. absence of materials leads to inaction. (Para 4) |
| 3. court acknowledges need for documentation. (Para 5 , 6) |
| 4. authority must consider requests with proper documentation. (Para 7) |
O R D E R
This writ petition has been filed by the petitioner seeking a writ of mandamus directing the respondent to include the name of the petitioner as “P.Mani @ Gopalakrishnan” instead of “Mani” in the employees' provident fund records in PPO No.MDMDU00081258, by considering his representation dated
31.07.2017.
2. The admitted facts are that the petitioner, namely, P.Mani worked in an establishment, namely, M/s.New Tirupur Lodge in Palani, since 01.03.1971 till 13.04.2013 and retired from service on attaining the age of superannuation. The petitioner was accordingly enrolled with the Employees' Provident Fund Organisation with PF Account No.TN/1891/A/66 and accordingly, provident fund contributions were remitted by the establishment concerned for 42 long years i.e., from 1971 to 2013. After the petitioner retired from service, through PPO No.MD/MDU/81258, the petitioner was sanctioned monthly pension of Rs.2,193/- and thereafter
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
