Delhi High Court - Orders
M/S Planman Hr (Pvt.) Ltd vs Regional Provident Fund Commissioner ... on 16 December, 2020
Author: Prathiba M. Singh
Bench: Prathiba M. Singh
Signature Not Verified
Digitally Signed By:DINESH
SINGH NAYAL
Signing Date:17.12.2020
15:34:13
$~20
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
+ W.P.(C) 10467/2020 & CM APPL. 33116/2020
M/S PLANMAN HR (PVT.) LTD. ..... Petitioner
Through: Mr. K.C. Dubey, Advocate (M-
9810445502)
versus
REGIONAL PROVIDENT FUND COMMISSIONER
(NORTH) ..... Respondent
Through: Mr. Balraj Dewan, Advocate (M-
9582098620).
CORAM:
JUSTICE PRATHIBA M. SINGH
ORDER
% 16.12.2020
1. This hearing has been done through video conferencing.
2. The present writ petition has been filed on the premise that the order passed by the Respondent-Authorities under Section 7A of the Employees' Provident Funds and Miscellaneous Provisions Act, 1952 (hereinafter 'EPF Act') as well as the order passed under Sections 14B and 7Q of EPF Act have not been supplied to the Petitioner and hence they are unable to challenge the same in accordance with law. Ld. counsel for the Petitioner accordingly prays that the same be supplied to them. The second prayer of the Petitioners is that execution of the orders should be kept in abeyance till an appeal/revision is filed by the Petitioner.
3. Mr. Balraj Dewan, ld. counsel appearing for the RPFC submits that as per the e-mail placed on record at page 25 of the petition, it has been clearly recorded therein that the orders were supplied to the Petitioner on 6th August, 2019 and that the same are available on the e-court portal.
4. Without going into the question as to whether the orders were supplied Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed By:PRATHIBA M SINGH W.P.(C) 10467/2020 Page 1 of 3 Signing Date:16.12.2020 20:59 Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed By:DINESH SINGH NAYAL Signing Date:17.12.2020 15:34:13 or not, in order to bring an end to the controversy, the RPFC is directed to supply both the orders once again to Mr. Dubey, ld. counsel by e-mail.
5. In fact, recently in W.P.(C) 9530/2020 titled M/s Civicon Engineering Contract India Pvt. Ltd. v. Central Board of Trustees & Ors., this Court had noticed the fact that the orders of the RPFC/APFC and other authorities under the EPF Act are not being made available to litigants and lawyers in time and accordingly, the following directions had been issued:
"7. Almost all courts and tribunals across the country make their orders and proceeding sheets available online. The necessity for the same, especially during the COVID-19 pandemic needs no emphasis. It is part of good governance of all institutions, especially authorities and bodies performing public functions to provide services to the maximum extent possible by integrating technology in their everyday working. The EPFO need not be an exception. A perusal of the EPFO's website shows that there are more than 6.6 lakh establishments registered with the EPFO. An online search also reveals that on the website www.eproceedings.epfindia.gov.in, in the window relating to daily orders, not a single order dated 3rd June 2019 is uploaded. Thus, there appears to be a clear lapse by the authorities.
8. Accordingly, it is directed that the Central Provident Fund Commissioner ('CPFC') shall pass immediate practice directions in respect of uploading of all orders which are passed by the Regional Provident Fund Commissioners (RPFCs), Assistant Provident Fund Commissioners (APFC), Central Government Industrial Tribunal (CGIT) and any other officials/authorities who adjudicate disputes. The said practice directions shall stipulate the manner of passing orders, timelines for uploading, timelines for communication to parties Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed By:PRATHIBA M SINGH W.P.(C) 10467/2020 Page 2 of 3 Signing Date:16.12.2020 20:59 Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed By:DINESH SINGH NAYAL Signing Date:17.12.2020 15:34:13 etc., which shall be adhered to by all the adjudicating authorities/officers. The orders ought to be, in addition, communicated by email to the parties while simultaneously being uploaded on the EPFO website."
6. In view of the above, it is directed that both orders passed by the RPFC in respect of the Petitioner shall be provided by way of e-mail within a week.
7. Insofar as any delay is concerned, the Petitioner is permitted to seek condonation of delay in accordance with law, before the appropriate forum.
8. With these observations, the present petition is disposed of. All pending applications are also disposed of.
PRATHIBA M. SINGH, J DECEMBER 16, 2020 Rahul/A Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed By:PRATHIBA M SINGH W.P.(C) 10467/2020 Page 3 of 3 Signing Date:16.12.2020 20:59