----------------------- The petitioner is the complainant in Complaint No.2471/07 before the Hon’ble Lok Ayukta. This complaint was dismissed for non-prosecution. A restoration petition was filed for restoration of the case. The Hon’ble Upa Lok Ayukta dismissed the restoration petition as per Ext.P2 Order. Challenging Ext.P2 Order, the petitioner has approached this Court. The complaint of the petitioner is that he is entitled for Rs.1,62,943/- towards Provident Fund. But the 1st respondent gave only a sum of Rs.53,570/- in cash after obtaining signed receipt of Rs.1,62,943/-. Challenging the order of dismissal, this writ petition is filed.
2. Counter affidavit has been filed on behalf of respondents 1 and 2. It is stated in Ext.P2 that the reason stated to seek adjournment was not convincing. It seems that adjournment was on account of the inconvenience of the counsel. No doubt the petitioner cannot be found fault with adjournment sought by his counsel. Under such circumstances, if the counsel was not W.P.(C).No.15289 of 2014
2
proceeding the matter, the petitioner might have given an opportunity by the Lok Ayukta to proceed with the matter. In view of the above, Ext.P2 is set aside. The complaint is restored. The petitioner and 1st respondent shall appear before the Lok Ayukta on 12.1.2015.
The writ petition is disposed of as above.
Sd/ A.MUHAMED MUSTAQUE, JUDGE jm/