EPF matters orders dated 25.08.2025 CGIT-1 Delhi on 25 August 2025

1. Counsel for the appellant has pressed an application under rule 5, read with rules 20 and 21 of the Tribunal Procedure Rules, 1997 for restoration of the appeal which was dismissed for non-prosecution.

2. He submitted that Sh. Sanjay Gandhi, the proprietor of the Appellant Establishment had lost her sister and was performing her last rites/rituals at Haridwar on 17th and 18th of July, 2025, therefore, he could not appear and attend the hearing before this Tribunal on 18.07.2025. He has received the intimation from the bank on 2nd August, 2025, when Mr. Gandhi had sent someone to withdraw some cash and he was informed by the bank that it had received a notice/order dated 31.07.2025 from the Recovery Officer, Delhi (North), consequent thereto, account of the appellant was freezed. He had made prayer that his appeal be restored. An order of status-quo-ante be passed.

3. Respondent counsel is present and opposed the application stating that the counsel Sh. Rajiv Arora himself has made the statement before this Tribunal that he has not been in touch with his client for the last one year and believing that, this Tribunal had issued the notice through mail to the appellant for appearance on 18.07.2025. On 18.07.2025, appeal was dismissed. Therefore, respondent counsel submitted that appellant deserves no leniency and made prayer that application for restoration of appeal be dismissed with cost.

4. I have heard the argument at par and perused the record. The conduct of the appellant is not up to mark, yet, considering the fact that restoration of application has been filed within limitation, application for restoration of appeal stands allowed subject to the cost of Rs. 10,000/-. Out of which Rs. 5,000/- shall be paid to the respondent counsel and remaining Rs. 5,000/- be paid to the account of Registrar of CGIT-II bearing account no. 00000037153859985, SBI Jagatpuri (IFS- SBIN0018662).

5. The account which has been freezed by the department is directed to be de-freezed within three days of receiving of the order. Put up for argument on the stay application on 01.10.2025. Till then, interim order be continued.

6. BEFORE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL CUM LABOUR COURT, DELHI

D-1/31/2025 M/s Sagar Ratna Restaurants Pvt. Ltd. vs. APFC/ RPFC, Delhi North.

Present: None for the Appellant

Sh. Prateek Tyagi, A/R for the respondent.

Order Dated-25.08.2025 As Ld. Counsel for both the parties are not present due to strike, this case is adjourned to 10.10.2025.

BEFORE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL CUM LABOUR COURT, DELHI

204(4)2011 M/s Maharaja Aggarsen Public School. vs. APFC, Delhi.

Present: None for the Appellant

Sh. Mahendra Meena, A/R for the respondent.

BEFORE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL CUM LABOUR COURT, DELHI

D-1/29/2018 M/s Head Quarter Army Welfare Education Society vs. APFC, Delhi (West).

Present: None for the Appellant

Sh. Yash Narayan, proxy for the respondent.

BEFORE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL CUM LABOUR COURT, DELHI

D-1/74/2019 M/s The Sikh Times vs. APFC, Delhi (North).

Present: None for the Appellant

Sh. Mahendra Meena, A/R for the respondent.

BEFORE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL CUM LABOUR COURT, DELHI

D-1/86/2019 M/s Seasons Furnishing Limited vs. APFC, Delhi.

Present: None for the Appellant

Sh. Narender Kumar, proxy for the respondent.

Order Dated-25.08.2025 Record perused. For the last several occasions matter has not come up on board and it has been adjourned en-block by the predecessor of this tribunal. Let the case be listed for final arguments on 20.11.2025. A notice be issued to the appellant through email.

BEFORE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL CUM LABOUR COURT, DELHI

D-1/91/2019 M/s Teleone Consumers Product Pvt. Ltd. vs. RPFC, Delhi (North).

Present: None for the Appellant

Sh. Mahendra Meena, A/R for the respondent.

BEFORE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL CUM LABOUR COURT, DELHI

D-1/108/2019 M/s Advance Services Pvt. Ltd. vs. RPFC, Delhi (East) and 05 others.

Present: None for the Appellant

Sh. M. Aarunesh, for the respondent no. 7.