Competent authority must decide the EPF claim after verification and release the admissible amount within 45 days.

The petitioner, a retired Assistant Revenue Inspector of Nagar Palika Nigam, Korba, claimed outstanding employees’ provident fund contribution of ₹3,78,489 along with interest.

He asserted that the Employees’ Provident Fund Organisation had already transferred the amount to the Urban Administration and Development Department. This transfer was not controverted or disputed by the EPFO’s counsel.

The petitioner had submitted a representation dated 06.07.2026 before the Director, Urban Administration and Development Department, seeking release of the amount.

He accordingly filed the writ petition seeking a direction for consideration of the representation and disbursement of the amount.

Whether the competent authority should be directed to consider and decide the petitioner’s representation dated 06.07.2026 concerning the alleged outstanding EPF contribution.

Whether the petitioner was entitled to release of the amount found payable, together with admissible interest, after verification of his claim.

The Court applied the principle that a competent administrative authority must consider and decide a duly submitted representation in accordance with law, on its own merits, and after proper verification of the underlying claim.

Where the entitlement and exact amount require administrative examination, the High Court may issue a limited mandamus for consideration and decision rather than adjudicating the claim itself.

No specific statutory provision or judicial precedent was cited in the order; the direction was expressly made subject to applicable law, verification, and admissible interest.

Since the petitioner had already submitted a representation and alleged that the EPF amount had been transferred to the Urban Administration and Development Department, the Court considered it appropriate for the competent authority to examine the claim administratively.

The State agreed that the representation would be considered and decided within 45 days.

The Court therefore refrained from determining the petitioner’s substantive entitlement or conclusively accepting the claimed amount, directing respondent No. 2 to verify the claim and decide it on its own merits in accordance with law.

Respondent No. 2 was directed to consider and decide the petitioner’s representation dated 06.07.2026 in accordance with law and on its own merits, and, after due verification, release the amount found payable along with admissible interest within 45 days from receipt of a copy of the order.

The Court clarified that it had expressed no opinion on the merits of the petitioner’s claim.