7130/Enf.I (1) 2003 dated
01.07.2003 passed under Para 26B of the EPF Scheme read along with
Section ... COMMON ORDER
Challenging the order dated 01.07.2003 passed under Para 26B of
the Employees’ Provident Fund Scheme (hereinafter referred to as the
“EPF Scheme
9855 of 2019
the impugned order of the first respondent under Para 26B of the
Employees Provident Fund Scheme, 1952, in No.TN/NGL/29372 ... against the order passed
by the first respondent dated 21.02.2019, under Para 26B of the Employees
Provident Fund Scheme, 1952.
2.The petitioner establishment
Kerala State. The Regional Provident Fund Commissioner at Ambattur as per para 26B of the EPF Scheme has to examine the matter after giving ... cited supra). Ultimately, when the authority decides the matter under para 26B, this court cannot give any direction that certain issues will have
present review order was passed on 15.03.2022
without discussing about the para 26B of the EPF Scheme. The 2nd
respondent failed to take note that ... Rogar Charles Willson aka Chef
Willi. Moreover as per the scheme para 26B, both employer and
employee shall be heard before passing the order
determination made by the Regional Provident Fund Commissioner in terms of para 26B of the Employees Provident Fund Scheme, 1952.
2. We have heard ... Regional Provident Fund Commissioner initiated an enquiry in terms of para 26B of the Employees Provident Fund Scheme, 1952. After giving opportunities to the Management
fresh challenge not only to the order dated 01.07.2003 made under
Para 26B of the Scheme but also the order dated 17.08.2004 made
under Section
V.M. Rao And Ors. vs Rajeswari Ramakrishnan And Ors. on 2 August, 1985
Equivalent
Indian Bank vs M/S Nippon Enterprises South on 8 March, 2011
Equivalent citations: AIR
N. Rengasamy vs S. Ganesan on 22 July, 2003
Equivalent citations: AIR 2004 MADRAS 436
Janata Sahakari Bank Ltd vs Tax Recovery Officer Vii on 19 July, 2021
Author: S
