Maharashtra Navanirman Kamagar Sena vs the Employees Provident Fund Organization — Bombay HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

Maharashtra Navanirman Kamagar Sena vs the Employees Provident Fund Organization — Bombay HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Petition disposed of with directions: registry of CGIT – 1 to list matters lodged in 2012-2013 onwards on priority basis before the In-charge CGIT – 1; advocates physically appearing given liberty to address the Presiding Officer through virtual mode; precedence to old matters for early decision; Petitioner's advocate to place a copy of the order before the Presiding Officer, CGIT – 1.

Issue for consideration

Whether directions were required to address the vacancy of Presiding Officers of the Central Government Industrial Tribunals (CGITs) and secure their functioning, including at Mumbai. +1 more

Court's answer

Recorded (on the ASG's information, not a determination of this Court): appointments of Presiding Officers to the various Tribunals were progressing through a Search-cum-Selection Committee chaired by Hon'ble Shri Justice A.S. Oka, Judge, Supreme Court of India, with an assurance that the High Court would be kept informed of further developments.

Ratio / Principle

The Court expected/directed the registry of CGIT – 1 to list matters lodged in 2012-2013 onwards on priority basis before the In-charge CGIT – 1.

Key takeaways

Learned Advocates physically appearing in the matters were given liberty to address the Presiding Officer through the virtual mode.ratio¶18
Precedence would be given to old matters for an early decision before CGIT – 1.ratio¶18
The learned Advocate for the Petitioner was to place a copy of the order before the Presiding Officer, CGIT – 1.ratio

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Bombay High Court (Ordinary Original Civil Jurisdiction), Writ Petition No. 4116 of 2024 (decided 29 April 2025) — Maharashtra Navanirman Kamgar Sena v. The Employees Provident Fund Organization & Ors.: With the offices of the Presiding Officers of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal (CGIT) lying vacant, the Court sought the assistance of the Additional Solicitor General, who reported that appointments of Presiding Officers to the various Tribunals were progressing through a Search-cum-Selection Committee chaired by Hon'ble Shri Justice A.S. Oka, Judge, Supreme Court of India, and assured that the High Court would be kept informed. Noting that CGIT – 2 was now available at Mumbai with hearings commenced, and CGIT – 1 functioned from Lucknow and Mumbai (visits to Mumbai approximately two days in two months), the Court expected the registry of CGIT – 1 to list matters lodged in 2012-2013 onwards on priority basis before the In-charge CGIT – 1, permitted advocates physically appearing to address the Presiding Officer through the virtual mode, gave precedence to old matters for early decision, and directed the Petitioner's advocate to place a copy of the order before the Presiding Officer, CGIT – 1. Petition disposed of with these directions.

Digitally signed by GAURI AMIT GAURI GAEKWAD AMIT Date: GAEKWAD 2025.05.03 15:35:47 +0530

2.WP-4116-2024.odt

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION

WRIT PETITION NO.4116 OF 2024

Maharashtra Navanirman Kamgar Sena ….Petitioner

Versus

The Employees Provident Fund Organization & Ors. ….Respondents

Mr. Vinod Shetty for the Petitioner. Mrs. Shehnaz V. Bharucha for Respondent Nos.1 to 3. Mr. Anil Singh, ASG a/w. Ms. Priyanka Chavan for Respondent No.5.

CORAM : RAVINDRA V. GHUGE & ASHWIN D. BHOBE, JJ. DATE : 29^th APRIL, 2025

P.C. :-

Considering the peculiar situation of the office of the

Presiding Officers of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal (CGIT) being vacant, we requested the learned Additional Solicitor General of India to assist the Court.

Mr. Singh has informed us, on instructions, that it would not take too much of time for a positive development on this issue, considering the progress being made by the Union of India, through a Search-cum-Selection Committee chaired by Hon’ble Shri Justice A.S. Oka, Judge, Supreme Court of India, for appointing Presiding Officers to the various Tribunals. Mr. Singh assures us of keeping the High Court informed of further developments.

1 of 2

Gauri Gaekwad

2.WP-4116-2024.odt

Insofar as the present Petition is concerned, the CGIT - 2 is now available at Mumbai and the hearing in various matters has commenced. CGIT – 1 is functioning from Lucknow and Mumbai, with visits to Mumbai for approximately two days, in two months.

We expect the registry of CGIT – 1 to list matters which are being lodged in 2012-2013 onwards on priority basis before the In-charge CGIT – 1. The learned Advocates physically appearing in the matters, also have the liberty to address the Presiding Officer through the virtual mode. Precedence would be given to old matters for an early decision.

The learned Advocate for the Petitioner would place a copy of this order before the Presiding Officer, CGIT – 1.

With the above directions, this Petition is disposed off .

(ASHWIN D. BHOBE, J.) (RAVINDRA V. GHUGE, J.)

2 of 2

Gauri Gaekwad