Para 2.24 — GPF_MANUAL

2.24 Execution can not be sought against the Provident Fund money by way of appointment of a receiver. The fact that the P.F. amount was not paid to the subscriber, after the date of his retirement, does not make it any less a compulsory deposit within the meaning of the Provident Fund Act. The meaning has been made clear by the definition in Section 2 of the Act under which, any deposit ‘remaining to the credit of the subscriber or a depositor after the happening of any such contingency is also a compulsory deposit and the contingency may be ‘retirement from service’. ( Judjement of the Supreme Court of India in Civil Appeal No. 132 of 1951. The Union of India verses Smt. Hira Devi received under CAG’s letter no. 992-A/80-53 dated 22-9-1953.