Central Government Industrial Tribunal

Cgit-1 Delhi order dated 29.04.2026 D-1/23/2024 M/s Mahagun India Pvt. Ltd vs Regional Provident Fund Commissioner on 29 April 2026

BEFORE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL DELHI-1

D-1/23/2024

M/s Mahagun India Pvt. Ltd.

C-227, Vivek Vihar, Delhi-110095.

…….Appellant

Versus

Regional Provident Fund Commissioner, Delhi East.

……Respondent

Present:

Sh. S.K. Gupta, counsel for the Appellant.

Sh. S.N. Mahanta, counsel for the Respondent.

1. The appellant had filed the present appeal challenging an order dated 12.01.2024 of the respondent vide which the respondent had directed the appellant to pay the outstanding dues of Rs.6,27,44,486/- only under the provisions of Employees Provident Fund and Miscellaneous provisions Act, 1952 (for short the “EPF Act”). As required under section 7-O of the EPF Act, this tribunal had directed the appellant to deposit forty percent of the assessed amount by way of FDR favouring Registrar CGIT for one year within six weeks vide order dated December 01, 2025.

2. Upon an application filed by the appellant seeking extension of time for complying with the directions of this Tribunal vide order dated December 01, 2025, this Tribunal had granted a further extension of two months to the appellant for complying with the above-said orders dated December 01, 2025.

M/s Mahagun India Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Regional Provident Fund Commissioner, Delhi East.

Page 1 of 2

3. Now even the extended period of two months granted to the appellant for complying with the orders of this Tribunal dated December 01, 2025 has expired. The Secretary of this Tribunal has reported that the appellant has again failed to comply with the orders dated December 01, 2025 of this Tribunal.

4. The present appeal of the appellant cannot be entertained by this Tribunal unless the appellant has deposited seventy five percent of the assessed amount or any reduced amount permitted by the Tribunal, with the Tribunal as per mandate of section 7-O of the EPF Act. Since the appellant has failed to deposit even the reduced amount as permitted by this Tribunal, the present appeal cannot be entertained as per Section 7-O of the EPF Act.

5. Hence, the present appeal of the appellant is hereby dismissed for non-compliance of the mandatory provisions of Section 7-O of the EPF Act.

,,

6. Case file be consigned to the Record Room.

Sd/- (Ajay Kumar Jain) Presiding Officer CGIT-cum-Labour Court, Delhi-1 29.04.2026

Page 2 of 2

Loading citations and judicial treatment…

You have used today's free searches. Sign in, for free, to keep searching without a limit.

Compass reads the judgments for you and finds the paragraphs for and against your question. Sign in to use it.

My Vault follows judgments for you and records every later decision that cites them. Sign in to keep one.

Sign in to download the court's PDF. The full text stays free to read here.

Search and read Indian judgments without limits, save them to My Vault and find the relevant paragraphs with Compass.

Open the sign-in page instead