Madhya Pradesh High Court
WP/13664/2023 of IMAST OPERATION PRIVATE LIMITED THROUGH ITS AUTORIZED DIRECTOR ANKUR PATHAK Vs UNION OF INDIA on 2 February 2024
COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH AT INDORE BEFORE HON'BLE SHRI
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESHAT INDORE
BEFORE
HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE VIVEK RUSIAON THE 2[nd] OF FEBRUARY, 2024
WRIT PETITION No. 13664 of 2023
BETWEEN:-
IMAST OPERATION PRIVATE LIMITED THROUGH ITSAUTORIZED DIRECTOR ANKUR PATHAK S/O SHRI ANILPATHAK, AGED ABOUT 36 YEARS, OCCUPATION:BUSINESS 602-604 PRINCES BUSINESS SKYPAR SCHEMENO. 54 OP. ORBIT MALL A.B. ROAD, DISTRICT INDORE(MADHYA PRADESH)
.....PETITIONER
(SHRI HEMENDRA JAIN, LEARNED COUNSEL FOR THE PETITIONER.)
AND
1.UNION OF INDIA THROUGH THE SECRETARYMINISTRY OF LABOUR AND EMPLOYMENTGOVERNMENT OF MADHYA PRADESHEMPLOYEE PROVIDENT FUND ORGANIZATIONSHRAM SHAKTI BHAWAN RAFI MARG, NEWDELHI (DELHI)MINISTRY OF LABOUR AND EMPLOYMENTGOVERNMENT OF MADHYA PRADESHEMPLOYEE PROVIDENT FUND ORGANIZATIONSHRAM SHAKTI BHAWAN RAFI MARG, NEWDELHI (DELHI)
2.REGIONAL PROVIDENT FUND COMMISSIONER II,COMPLANCE CIRCLE 1 REGIONAL OFFICE (RO),INDORE, EMPLOYEE PROVIDENT FUNDORGANIZATION IDA BUILDING, 7 RACE COURSEROAD, INDORE (MADHYA PRADESH)COMPLANCE CIRCLE 1 REGIONAL OFFICE (RO),INDORE, EMPLOYEE PROVIDENT FUNDORGANIZATION IDA BUILDING, 7 RACE COURSEROAD, INDORE (MADHYA PRADESH)
3.REGIONAL PROVIDENT FUND COMMISSIONER IIAND RECOVERY OFFICER REGIONAL OFFICE(RO) INDORE, EMPLOYEE PROVIDENT FUNDORGANIZATION IDA BUILDING, 7 RACE COURSEROAD, INDORE (MADHYA PRADESH)AND RECOVERY OFFICER REGIONAL OFFICE(RO) INDORE, EMPLOYEE PROVIDENT FUNDORGANIZATION IDA BUILDING, 7 RACE COURSEROAD, INDORE (MADHYA PRADESH)
.....RESPONDENTS
(SHRI ASHUTOSH SHARMA, LEARNED COUNSEL FOR THERESPONDENT NO.1.)(SHRI ADITYA JAIN, LEARNED COUNSEL FOR THE RESPONDENTS NO. 2AND 3.)
This petition coming on for hearing this day, the court passed the following:
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.
ORDER
01. The petitioner has filed the present petition challenging order passedby the Assistant Provident Fund Commissioner u/s. 7A of the EmployeesProvident Fund and Miscellaneous Provisions Act, 1952 instead of approachingthe CGIT which is an appellate authority on the ground that there was noPresiding Officer.
02. Vide order dated 26.6.2023 this Court protected the petitioner fromany coercive action.
03. Respondent No.1 has filed the reply by submitting that Shri PurnenduKumar Srivastava has been appointed as Presiding Officer, therefore, now theCGIT is functional.
04. In view of the above, this petition is disposed of with a liberty toapproach the CGIT. If an appeal is filed within a month from today, the sameshall be entertained without any application for condonation of delay. Theinterim protection granted by this Court to the petitioner on 26.6.2023 shallremain in force for a period of two months from today.
C.C. as per rules.
Alok Digitally signed by ALOK GARGAV Date: 2024.02.03 11:32:26 +05'30'
(VIVEK RUSIA)JUDGE