Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 0, Cited by 0]

Central Administrative Tribunal - Delhi

Jatinder Ilamwadi vs M/O Labour on 1 May, 2024

                                      1
Item No.26                                        O.A. NO. 2156/2017

                   Central Administrative Tribunal
                     Principal Bench, New Delhi
                                O.A. No. 2156/2017

                         Dated this the 1st day of May, 2024

                   Hon'ble Mr. R N Singh, Member (J)
                 Hon'ble Mr. Sanjeeva Kumar, Member (A)

              1. Mrs. Jatinder Ilamwadi, Age-52 years, Group "C" W/o Sh.
        Harvinder Singh, Presently Section Supervisor, R/O BQ-109, Shalimar
        Bagh, New Delhi-110088.

        2. Jag Pal Bindra, Age-50 year, Group "C" S/o Late Sh. R. K. Bindra,
        Presently Sr. Social Security Assistant, R/O 8/9, Transit Camp, New
        Moti Nagar New Delhi-110015.

        3. Mr. Sanjeev Chopra, age-50 years, Group "C" S/o Sh. A. L. Chopra,
        presently Sr. Social Security Assistant, R/O House no. 35, sector-41
        Gurgaon.

        4. Mr. Yogesh Kakkar, Age- 48 years, Group "C" S/o Sh. K. L. Kakkar,
        Presently Sr. Social Security Assistant R/o E-19/302, Sector-3 Rohini,
        Delhi-110085.

        5. Mrs. Promila Tuteja, Age-50 years, Group "C" W/o Sh. Atam Tuteja,
        Presently Sr. Social Security Assistant, R/O 96/9, Shiv Puri, Gurgaon.
                                                                  .....Applicants

        (Advocate: None)

                            Versus
     1. Central Provident Fund Commissioner, Employees Provident Fund
Organisation (Under the Ministry of Labour& Employment), 14, Bhikaji
Cama Place, New Delhi-110066

2. Additional Central Provident Fund Commissioner (HR) Bhavishya Nidhi
Bhawan, (HR) Employees Provident Fund Organisation (Under Ministry of
Labour), 14, Bhikaji Cama Place NEW DELHI-110066
3. Regional Provident Fund Commissioner, Delhi (N) Bhavishya Nidhi
Bhawan, 28, Community Centre, Wazirpur Industrial Area, Delhi-110052.

4. Regional Provident Fund Commissioner, Delhi(S) EPFO Complex, Plot
No. 23, Sector-23, Dwarka, Delhi-110075.

5. Rachna Mathur Through Respondent No.3

6. Sridaya Prabhakar Through Respondent No.3
                                2
Item No.26                         O.A. NO. 2156/2017


    7. Gulshan Bhatia
    Through Respondent No.3

    8. Sunil Ranjan
    Through Respondent No.3

    9. Bahadur Singh
    Through Respondent No.3

    10. Dayanand Sharma
    Through Respondent No.3

    11. Arun Kumar Das
    Through Respondent No.3

    12. Santosh Kumar
    Through Respondent No.3

    13. Rakesh Ranjan Singh
    Through Respondent No.3

    14. Rajinder Kumar Yadav
    Through Respondent No.3

    15. Suresh Kumar
    Through Respondent No.3

    16. Sudha Kalra
    Through Respondent No.3

    17. Jai Prakash Yadav
    Through Respondent No.3

    18. Mahesh Kumar
    Through Respondent No.3

    19. Sanjay Kumar Das
    Through Respondent No.3

    20. Devinder Kumar
    Through Respondent No.3

    21. Vaishali Aneja
    Through Respondent No.3

    22. Veena Gupta
    Through Respondent No.3
                               3
Item No.26                        O.A. NO. 2156/2017

    23. Lok Nath Sah
    Through Respondent No.3

    24 Rita Rani
    Through Respondent No.3

    25. Neeta Kulvi
    Through Respondent No.3

    26. Sanjeev Kumar Verma
    Through Respondent No.3

    27. Vipin Kumar Gupta
    Through Respondent No.3

    28. Meena Joshi
    Through Respondent No.3

    29. Saroj Kumar Jha
    Through Respondent No.3

    30. Ram Kishan
    Through Respondent No.3

    31. Narendra Kumar
    Through Respondent No.3

    32. Praveen Kalra
    Through Respondent No.3

    33. Gulshan Rani
    Through Respondent No.3

    34. Balvinder Kaur
    Through Respondent No.3

    35. Sunita Sahni
    Through Respondent No.3

    36. Jitender Bansal
    Through Respondent No.3

    37. Seema Vasudeva
    Through Respondent No.3

    38. Suman Dalal
    Through Respondent No.3

    39. Hemlata
                                 4
Item No.26                          O.A. NO. 2156/2017

    Through Respondent No.3

    40. Awanish Kumar Joshi
    Through Respondent No.3

    41. Anil Kumar
    Through Respondent No.3

    42. Shashi Bhardwaj
    Through Respondent No.3

    43. Renu Sharma
    Through Respondent No.3

    44. Simmi Suneja
    Through Respondent No.3

    45. Mangat Ram
    Through Respondent No.3

    46. Kamal Dabral
    Through Respondent No.3

    47. Dharamvir Singh Payal
    Through Respondent No.3

    48. Akchhya Kumar Mittal
    Through Respondent No.3

    49. Dinesh Kumar Jha
    Through Respondent No.3

    50. Revti Biroria
    Through Respondent No.3

    51. Surat Singh
    Through Respondent No.3

    52. Mahabir Singh Gautam
    Through Respondent No.3

    53. Raman Sharma
    Through Respondent No.3

    54. Chetna Jain
    Through Respondent No.3

    55. Savita Sharma
    Through Respondent No.3
                                        5
Item No.26                                 O.A. NO. 2156/2017


     56. Daleep Kumar
     Through Respondent No. 3

     57. Ramesh Kumar
     Through Respondent No. 3

     58. Raj Kumar
     Through Respondent No. 3
                                                         ...Respondents


        (Advocate: Mr. Satpal Singh)
                                      6
Item No.26                                   O.A. NO. 2156/2017

                                O R D E R (ORAL)

Hon'ble Mr. R. N. Singh, Member (J) None for the applicant.

2. Matter is listed for final hearing. There is no representation on behalf of the applicant. Learned counsel for the respondents is present and is ready to argue the matter. He presses hearing and disposal of the O.A. He further submits that on the last date of hearing, i.e., on 11.01.2024, there was no representation on behalf of the applicant. Even prior to that, i.e., on 31.07.2023, there was no representation on behalf of the applicant. Further, before that also, irregular representation is found on behalf of the applicant.

3. It appears that the applicant has lost interest in the matter. Accordingly, the O.A. is dismissed in default and for non-prosecution.

             (Sanjeeva Kumar)                             (R.N. Singh)
              Member (A)                                   Member (J)

        kk/