Mohd Shoaib Ahmed v. 1. The Employees Provident Fund Organizatio-n'

Petition under Article 226 of lhe Constitution of lndia praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith' the High Court may be pleased to issue a writ or direction' preferably in the nature -'of a Writ. of Mandamus, (a) to declare the action of the respondent 1 to 3 in not responding on the representations dated 25-10-2024' 28-10-2024' 27-11-2024 and 11_12_2024 to activate my UAN as iilegar and arbitrary, unconstitutional in violation of Art. 19, 21 and also contrary to the procedure prescribed under The Employees Provident Funds and Miscellaneous Provisions Act 1952 and rules made there under and consequently direct the respondents to activate my UAN No.101356802784(EPFAccountnumber)forthwith(b)todirectthe4th .7:. respondent to release the pending dues of my sarary of four rnonths comes to Rs.1,34,800/- without any further delay. lA NO: 1 OF 2o25 Petition unrJel 9s611.. 1s1 cpc praying that in the circurnstances stated in the affidavit filerd in sgpp6;1 of the petition, the High Court may be pleased to direct the respon,rents to activate my UAN No. 10135680 2184 (EpF Account) forthwith, pending disposal of the writ petition. Counsel for the Petitioner: SRI KRUpACHAND GOGTNENI Counsel for the Respondent No.1 to 3: SRI G.VENKATESHWARLU, SC FOR EPFO The Couft made the following: ORDER ('l HON'BLE SRI JUSTICEJ. SREENTVAS RAO WRIT PE"TITION No.4OO9 of 2o25 ORDER: This writ petition is filed seeking the following relief: to issue a writ or direction, preferably in the nature of a Writ of Mandamus, (a) to declare the action of tJ e respondents I to 3 in not responding on the representations dated 25.70.2024, 28.10.2024, 27.11.2024 and 11.12.2024 to activate my UAN as ilIegal and arbitrary, unconstitutional in violation of Art. 19, 21 and also contrary to the procedure prescribed under The Employees Provident Funds and Miscellaneous Provisions Act 1952 and rules made thereunder and consequently direct ttre respondents to activate my UAN No. 101356802784 (EPF Account number) forthwith (b) to direct the 4th respondent to release tJre pending dues of my salary of four months comes to Rs.1,34,8O0/- without any further delay...'

2. Heard Sri Krupachand Gogineni, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri G.Venkateshwarlu, learned Standing Counsel appearing on behalf of respondent Nos.1 to 3.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that pursuant to the order dated 12.02.2025, he sent personal notice to respondent No.4 by way of registered post with 2 acknowledgment due as well Ssthrough e-mail and the notice sent through registered post was returned with a postal endorsement as 'addressee left,and hled proof of service vide USR No.215Ol of 2025 on27.O2.2O24. Insofar as notice sent through e-mail, respondent No.4 received the sarne on

21.O2.2O2i;. Learned counsel for the petitioner resrricted the relief to 1he extent of consideration ol- repre sentations submitted by the petitioner dated 25.10.2024, 28.10.2024,

27.11.2024 and 11.72.2024 by the respondent authorities.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner 'Ls an engineer by profession and he joined in respondent No.4 Company on 26.11.2021 and rendered his services f:rom 26.11.2021 to 27.O5.2O24, for which respondent No.4 due ari amount of Rs.1,34,g00/_. However, respondent No.4 has not paid the same. Therr:after, he submitted resignation and the sarne was accepted by respondent No.4.

5. He further submitted that due to Covid-l9 paldemic, the Central Government introduced the Atmanirbhar Bharat Rojgar Yojana (ABRY Scheme) to encourage businesses to 3 retain the employees arrd suppoEl-them during the economic disruptions caused by the pandemic. Under the said scheme, Government provided subsidies to employers, covering both the employer and employees' share of the EPF contribution for a specifrc period. Respondent No.4 availed the benefit for two months i.e., January and February of 2022 exempting from making provident fund contributions. However, respondent No.6 seized the account i.e., UAN number of the petitioner on the alleged ground that respondent No.4 availed the benefits under the ABRY Scheme, though he is not eligible for the szrne. Immediately the petitioner approached respondent Nos.2 and 3 authorities and submitted representations on 25.70.2024, 2a.rc.2o24, 27.11.2024 and ll'12'2024 respectively requesting them to activate his UAN number and he did not commit aly mistake. In spite of the same, respondent authorities have not taken any action and the same is contrary to law.

6. He also submitted that the Enforcement Officer has already issued letter dated 12.11.2024 to the Assistant Provident Fund Commissioner, Compliance circle 518/02' 4 Regional Office, Madhapur, Hyderabad accepting ttre claim of the petitiorLer.

7. Learned Standing Counsel submitl.ed that if the representations submitted by the petitioners are stiil pending, respondent Nos.2 arrd 3 will consider the sarle in ar:cordance with law and requested this Court to grant reasonable time.

8. Havinl3 considered the riva_l submissions macle by the respective parties and after perusal of the material available on record, it reveals that the petitioner has submitted representations before respondent Nos.2 and 3 ar.rthorities requesting them to activate his UAN No.101356go2,,7g4 (EpF account nurnber), which was deactivatsed by them on the ground that respondent No.4 utilized the ABRy scheme for a period of trvo months and the said representations are pending consideration before respondent Nos.2 and 3 authorities 9 Taking into consideration the facts and circumstances, respondent Nos.2 and 3 are directed to consi<ler the representations submitted by the petitioner dated 25.10.2024, 28.t0.2024, 22.lt.2024 and 1 t.t2.20,.24 and I i I I ; i i .t*n. 5 pass appropriate orders in acc.o{Lance with law after giving opportunity to the petitioner by duly taking into consideration the letter issued by the Enforcement Officer dated 12.11.2024 to the Assistant Provident Fund Commissioner, Complialce circle 518/02, Regional Offrce, Madhapur, Hyderabad, within a period of three (3) weeks from the date of receipt of copy of this order.

10. With the above direction, the writ petition is disposed of. No order as to costs. Pending miscellaneous applications, if any, shall stand closed. To, //TRUE COPY// SD/-A.V.S.PRASAD ASSISTANT REGISTRAR SECTION OFFICER

1. The Regional Provident Fund Commissioner, Employees Prwident Fund Organizition, Employees Provident Fund, Barkatpura, Hyderabad'

2. The Regional P.F. Commissioner, Regional Office, Hyd^grabad (MADHAPUR) Bhavishyanidhi Bhawan, No. 3-4-763, Barkatpura Chaman' ( lelangana) Hyderabad - 50O O27

3. The Assistant Provident Fund commissioner, Employees fu-nd organization Reoional Office. Hvderabad (lMadhapur)' Bhavishyanidhi Bhawan' No 3-4- 765, Barkatpura Ch'aman, (Telangana) Hyderabad - 500 027'

4. The Managing Director, ONEPASSIVE Technologies PVT' Ltd , Having its office ai Obitnspire, Plot No.21, Sector 0'1,-Hitech city Rd' HUDA Techno Enclave, tVladhapur, Hyderabad, Telangana-500081.

5. One CC to SRI KRUPACHAND GOGINENI, Advocate [OPUC] 6. One CC to SRI G.VENKATESHWARLU' SC FOR EPFO [OPUC] 7 BSR GJP Two CD Copies s / CC TODAY E STAI€ 1 7 0l([q?ffi fr 1 c * DE SP aI '- 1: 5:! \ HIGH COURT DATED: 0610312025 ORDER WP.No.4009 of 2025 DISPOSING OF THE WRIT PETITION, WITHOUT COSTS ey" W