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 2, Cited by 0]

Gujarat High Court

M/S Ketan Construction Co. Ltd. Through ... vs Regional Provident Fund Commissioner on 7 April, 2025

                                                                                                                       NEUTRAL CITATION




                              C/SCA/4575/2025                                         ORDER DATED: 07/04/2025

                                                                                                                       undefined




                                     IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
                                       R/SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 4575 of 2025
                       ==========================================================
                            M/S KETAN CONSTRUCTION CO. LTD. THROUGH ITS AUTHORIZED
                                    REPRESENTATIVE MAYANK SHIVKUMAR VYAS
                                                    Versus
                                 REGIONAL PROVIDENT FUND COMMISSIONER & ANR.
                       ==========================================================
                       Appearance:
                       MR. RAHUL M BAROT(9965) for the Petitioner(s) No. 1
                       SHIVANI RAJPUROHIT(5377) for the Petitioner(s) No. 1
                       MR PATHIK M ACHARYA(3520) for the Respondent(s) No. 1,2
                       ==========================================================
                         CORAM:HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE M. K. THAKKER

                                                                Date : 07/04/2025

                                                                 ORAL ORDER

1. This petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying to stay the execution and implementation of the orders passed on 19.12.2024 under Sections 14B and 7Q of the EPF Act on the ground that though appeal is filed under Section 7-I of the EPF Act before learned CGIT, however, due to absence of learned CGIT, same could not be heard.

2. Learned advocate Ms.Shivani Rajpurohit submits that if these orders are not stayed then recovery proceedings would be initiated and coercive steps against the present petitioner would likely to be taken. Learned advocate Ms.Shivani Rajpurohit submits that it may cause hardship to the present petitioner.

Page 1 of 3 Uploaded by MRS. NIVYA ABHAY NAIR(HC01901) on Tue Apr 08 2025 Downloaded on : Tue Apr 08 22:56:07 IST 2025

NEUTRAL CITATION C/SCA/4575/2025 ORDER DATED: 07/04/2025 undefined

3. On the other hand, this petition is opposed by learned advocate Mr.Pathik Acharya. Learned advocate Mr.Pathik Acharya submits that as per his instructions the presiding officer of Jaipur Branch has been given the charge and he was visiting twice in a month upto the last month, however, thereafter charge was also not extended further. Learned advocate Mr.Pathik Acharya submits that he is required to show some bonafide by depositing the amount which is required for filing the appeal before the learned tribunal. Learned advocate Mr.Pathik Acharya submits that in absence of any deposit no relief can be granted to the present petitioner as learned tribunal would also be not in possession in absence of deposits except coming to the conclusion that application for interim stay is required to be granted. In view of the above, learned advocate prays to dismiss this petition.

4. Considering the submission made by learned advocate Ms.Shivani Rajpurohit and the decision in SCA No.6511 of 2022, relied by the learned advocate for the petitioner wherein, in the similar situation this Court has disposed of the matter by protecting the petitioner from coercive Page 2 of 3 Uploaded by MRS. NIVYA ABHAY NAIR(HC01901) on Tue Apr 08 2025 Downloaded on : Tue Apr 08 22:56:07 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION C/SCA/4575/2025 ORDER DATED: 07/04/2025 undefined steps till the decision of the appeal. In view of the above, this petition is allowed with following directions:

(a) The petition is disposed of in view of non availability of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal, Ahmedabad, wherein the appeal is filed by the petitioner.
(b) It is clarified that till the application for stay of the petitioner is heard on merits, the respondents are directed not to take coercive steps against the petitioner. It is further clarified that this court has not examined the matter on merits and since the Appellate Tribunal is not available on regular basis, the matter is disposed of in the aforesaid terms.
(c) It is clarified that the interim relief restraining the respondents from taking coercive steps will operate till the Tribunal hears the application for interim relief/stay.

The petition is disposed of, accordingly. Direct service is permitted.

5. Direct service is permitted.

(M. K. THAKKER,J) NIVYA A. NAIR Page 3 of 3 Uploaded by MRS. NIVYA ABHAY NAIR(HC01901) on Tue Apr 08 2025 Downloaded on : Tue Apr 08 22:56:07 IST 2025