Central Government Industrial Tribunal
EPF matters order dated 25.11.2025 CGIT-2 Delhi Except item no. 1 of the cause list which is already uploaded separately. on 25 November 2025
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
0
Decisions referred to
In this index
0
Of the decisions it cites
Overruled / Questioned
0
No negative treatment found
Loading the citing and cited decisions…
This judgment in the centre: on the left the decisions it cites, on the right the decisions citing it. Colour is the treatment; choose a decision to open it.
D-2/33/2019 M/s SCT (P) Ltd. vs. APFC Meerut. Present: None for the Appellant. None for the Respondent.
Order Dated-25.11.2025
Perusal of the appeal and the trial court record reveals that the impugned order has been passed in an unorganised manner. On top of the impugned order, it is mentioned that the order has been assessed for the period 04/2000 to 04/2000. Order further mentions the period of default as 06/2000 to 04/2000 and finally as 04/2000 to 04/2005 in the table made for showing the amount assessed as dues.
The top para of second page of the order indicate that the Enforcement Officer has visited the appellant establishment and contacted the appellant over telephone several times, but he had not produced the record. On further scrutiny of the file, the respondent has assessed the dues on basis of deposit made by the appellant for the month of 04/2000 and 05/2000 which the appellant establishment has admitted that payment was made in respect of few employees because the business had been closed down. The assessing officer has taken this figure by multiplying this figure with the number of months covered in the period of assessment.
Let the Enforcement Officer from Regional office Meerut remain present on the next date of hearing. Enforcement officer is directed to bring the list and details of the employees working in 04/2000 & 05/2000 whose PF had been deposited by the establishment. He is also directed to bring the record showing the contribution, if any deposited by this establishment after 05/2000 upto 2018 along with list of employees bearing their name and parentage working in this establishment. Put up on 15.12.2025 for further consideration.
Item no. 3 D-2/23/2020 M/s. Antony Road Transport Solutions Pvt. Ltd. vs. RPFC, Noida Present: None for the Appellant. Sh. B.B. Pradhan, Ld. Counsel for the Respondent. Order Dated-25.11.2025
Written arguments has already been filed on behalf of both the parties. Final arguments also heard and concluded. Let it be reserved for pronouncement of order.
Item no. 4 D-2/33/2022 OYO Hotels & Homes Pvt. Ltd. vs. RPFC, Gurgaon Present: Sh. K.K. Pandey, Ld. Counsel for the Appellant. Sh. B.B. Pradhan, Ld. Counsel for the Respondent. Order Dated-25.11.2025
Part argument heard. Put up for further argument on 12.01.2026.
Item no. 5 D-2/09/2023 M/s. Oravel Stays Limited. vs. RPFC, Gurugram East Present: Sh. K.K. Pandey, Ld. Counsel for the Appellant. Sh. B.B. Pradhan, Ld. Counsel & Sh. Neeraj, A/R for the Respondent. Order Dated-25.11.2025
Part argument heard. Put up for further argument on 12.01.2026.
Item no. 6 D-2/44/2024 M/s. JPM Automobiles Ltd. vs. APFC/ RPFC, Gurugram West Present: None for the Appellant. Sh. Narender Kumar, Ld. Counsel & Sh. Lalit Kumar, A/R for the Respondent. Order Dated-25.11.2025
Since the appellant counsel is not available today, let it be listed for 14.01.2026.