Telangana High Court
WP/14584/2025 of Adil Murtaza Vs The Regional P.F. Commissioner on 8 December 2025
IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) IMONDAY, THE EIGHTH DAY OF DECEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE NAGESH BHEEMAPAKA WRIT PETITION NO: 14584 OF 2025 Between: Adil tVurtaza, S/o. Waseem [Vlurtaza, aged about
IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD
(Special Original Jurisdiction)
IMONDAY, THE EIGHTH DAY OF DECEMBER
TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE NAGESH BHEEMAPAKA
WRIT PETITION NO: 14584 OF 2025
Between:
Adil tVurtaza, S/o. Waseem [Vlurtaza, aged about 46 years, Occ: Self-employed, Rl/o.
3002, Pioneer, Araya, Sector 62, Golf Course Extension Road, Gurgaon-1221O2
...PETITIONER
AND
1. The Regional P.F. Commissioner, Hyderabad, Bhavishyanidhi Bhawan' No.
3-4-763, Barkatpura Chaman, Hyderabad - 500027
2. Karvy Stock Broking Limited, Karuy Nilillennium, Plot No.31/P, Nanakramguda Financial District, Gachibowli, Hyderabad, Rangareddi TG 500032
, ..RESPONDENTS
Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of lndia praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may bd pleased to issue a writ, direction, or more particularly in the nature of Writ of [,4andamus or declaring the action of the Respondent No. 1 in issuing an impugned order with a Grievance lD APHYD/E/2024118815 dt. 1810612024 passed on 2510612024 and an impugned order with in Grievance lD APHYD/E120251O8720
dt.o4lo3l2o25 passed on 1010312025 rejecting the Petitioner's claim for transfer of his Provident Fund dues to his new employer as illegal, arbitrary, and contrary to the Employees' Provident Funds Act, 1952, the Employees Provident Funds Scheme, 1952 and Article 14 and Article 3004 of the Constitution of lndia, 1950
and consequentially direct the transfer of his PF Account, in the interest of justice.
lA NO: 1 OF 2025
Petition under Section 1 51 CPC praying that in the cir umstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Cou 1 may be pleased to suspend the impugned Order with a Grievance lD APF'DlEl2024l1BB15 dt.
18t0O12024 passed on 2510612024 and an impugned order vith in Grievance lD
APHYD|E|2025|0B72O dt.O4lo3l2025 passed on 10lO il2o25 issued by Respondent No. 1.
Counsel for the Petitioner: Ms. MANINI BHARATI, REPRESiI .NTING
SRI BOKARAO LOKESHWAR RET DY
Counsel for the Respondent No.1: SRI S. SURENDER REDI Y, S.C. FOR EPFO
Counsel for the Respondent No.2: -
The Court made the following: ORDER
IN THE HIGH COURT FOR TTIE STATE OF TELANGANA
AT TTYDERABAD
THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE N,qGESH BHEEMAPAKA
u/RIT PETITION No.14584 of 2o25
o4.L2.2025
Between:
Adil Murtaza
...Petitioner
AND
The Regional P. F.Commissioner, I{yderabad, Bhavishyanidhi Bhau,an, No.3-4-763, Barkatpura Chaman, Llyderabad and another
...Respondents
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
0
Decisions referred to
In this index
0
Of the decisions it cites
Overruled / Questioned
0
No negative treatment found
Loading the citing and cited decisions…
This judgment in the centre: on the left the decisions it cites, on the right the decisions citing it. Colour is the treatment; choose a decision to open it.
ORDER:
The petitioner chalienges the orders dated 25.06.2024 and 10.03.2025 passed by Respondent No.1 rejecting his pF transfer claims under Form- 1 3. He seeks a direction tc transfer his pF accumulations from his previous employer, Karvy Stock Broking Limited, to his present employer. I
2. Heard Ms.Manini Bharati, learned counsel representing Mr.Bokarao Lokeshwar Reddy, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri S.Surender Reddy, iearned Standing Ccunsel tbr EpFO. perused the record. -4,.-
3. The case of the petitioner is that petitioner ,r Deputy General Manager of respondent No.2-Cor registered under the, Employees' Provident Fund ar Provisions Act, 1952 (for short "the Act"). It is furth worked there from 23.05.2016 to 13.08.2021. It that his PF contributions were deducted every mc'l deposited by the emplover. Although PF amoun -' from his salary, the employer allegedly failed to own and the employee's contributions. After resi5l: for new employment, the petitioner sought to account and filed an online Transfer Claim Fo : 18.06.2024 ar,d the same \\ras rejected on 25.O6.i( petitioner Iiled another grievance on 04.O3.2025 zr rejected on 1O.03.2025. Aggneved by the same, h: writ petition.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner further I issue involved in this writ petition is squarely cor" dated 22.08.2024 passed by this Court in W.P'll' wherein it was held that an employee cannot be r PF accumulation merelv because the previous e a as appointed as Lpany, u,hich is i Miscellaneous :r stated that he s further stated th but were not were deducted leposit both its ,ing and moving lransfer his PF n (Form 13) on
24. Further, the Ld the same was filed the present ubmits that the red by the order .32058 of 2023, enied transfer of ployer defaulted in remitting contributions. It is submitted that a similar order may be passed even in this case.
5. When the. matter was taken up for hearing, learned Standing Counsel for trPFO, for respondent No.1 placed on record instructions dated 05.12.2025 issued by the Assistant P.F.Commissioner(Legal), Employees provident Fund Organization, wherein it is stated that Form 13 was transferred to BG/BNG/1645396111300 for an amount of Rs. 11,98, 11tl_ on 05.12.2025 duly taking date of exit as 30.06.2021 ( as per employer mail dated O5.l2 .2025 , a copy enclosed) and informed to the petitioner through main on 05.12.2025.
6. Considering the submissions made ald in view of the instructions placed on record by the learned Standing Counsel for EPF O stating that the petitioner's F orm- 13 has already been processed and the Provident Fund amount of Rs. 11,99, 111/_ has been transferred to BG/BNG/1645396/11300 on 05. 12.2025, and, the same has been duly communicated to the petitioner on 05.72.2025, it appears that the grievalce of the petitioner stands redressed. Accordingly, the u,rit pbtition is disposed of, recording the fact I I
that the Provident Fund transfer has been completed. However, it is
E \ \ To MP open to the petitioner to work out his remedies irL accordance with law if any further grievance persists. No order as tl costs Miscellaneous petitions, if any, pending in his writ petition shail stand closed. I SD/.A.H. ;. GOWRI SHANKAR ASS IS RAR //TRUE COPYII e\noru oFFrcER '1 . The Regional P.F. Commissioner, Hyderabad, Bhavi ;' anidhi Bhawan, No 3-4-7 63, Barkatpura Chaman, Hyderabad -500027
2. One CC to SRI BOKARAO LOKESHWAR REDDY, Adv )cate [OPUC]
3. One CCto SRI S. SURENDER REDDY, S C for EPFC) OPUCI
4. Two CD Copies a
I HIGH COURT DATIiD:08/1212025 1fi
ORDER
WP.No.14584 of 2025 DISPOSING OF THE I/J RIT PETITION " WIT {OUT COSTS
(l) \t \. ,, ). I (,,r:t 31tEt i., , ,- \'t 'i\ \- \.-.-'=i' i'i' & I b "(