Gujarat High Court
Employees vs Tipco on 7 March, 2012
Author: K.M.Thaker
Bench: K.M.Thaker
Gujarat High Court Case Information System
Print
SCA/127/2012 3/ 3 ORDER
IN
THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
SPECIAL
CIVIL APPLICATION No. 127 of 2012
=========================================================
EMPLOYEES
PROVIDENT FUND ORGANISATION THRO.ITS ASSISTANT - Petitioner(s)
Versus
TIPCO
INDUSTRIES LIMITED THRO ITS AUTHORIZED SIGNATORY - Respondent(s)
=========================================================
Appearance
:
MRS
VASAVDATTA BHATT for
Petitioner(s) : 1,
MR RV DESAI for Respondent(s) :
1,
=========================================================
CORAM
:
HONOURABLE
MR.JUSTICE K.M.THAKER
Date
: 07/03/2012
ORAL
ORDER
1. Heard Ms. Bhatt, learned Advocate for petitioner and Mr. Desai, learned Advocate for respondent.
2. It is jointly submitted by learned Advocates appearing for the contesting parties that the very order passed by the Appellate Tribunal is assailed by both i.e. respondent P.F. Department as well as the concerned employer.
3. So far as the P.F. Department is concerned, it is claimed that the order passed by the Appellate Authority is contrary to the P.F. Scheme framed under the provisions of the Act.
4. Considering the said submission and the record as well as the order passed by the Appellate Tribunal, it appears that the petition deserves consideration.
5. As mentioned above the concerned employer also has assailed the same order by separate petition.
6. Mr. Desai, learned Advocate for petitioner has submitted that the petition preferred by the employer is likely to come up for hearing on 15th March 2012.
7. In view of the above mentioned submission on behalf of learned Advocate for P.F. Department and also considering the fact that both the parties concerned in the order have challenged the same order, Rule.
8. By way of interim relief it is clarified that it will be open to the P.F. Authority to continue and proceed with the hearing of the matter (which is remitted by the Appellate Tribunal pursuant to and by virtue of the order impugned in the present petition) and conclude the hearing in accordance with law and after hearing the petitioner employer, however, if it is found that the order impugned in present petition may stand in way of taking appropriate and required decision in accordance with the scheme and the Act, then the department may not pass final order and await decision in present petition, if already not rendered.
(K.M.THAKER, J.) jani Top