Writ petition challenging a PF order directing a pre-deposit was allowed partially. The required deposit was reduced from 75% of the demand amount to a bank guarantee of Rs.50 crores, subjecting to conditions.
Pre-deposit reduced from 75% of demand amount to bank guarantee of Rs.50 crores payable within four weeks.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
$~3
*** IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI**
TECH MAHINDRA LTD ..... Petitioner Through: Mr. J.P. Cama, Senior Advocate with Ms. Shally Bhasin, Mr. Chaitanya Safaya and Ms. Shruti Garg, Advocates
versus
REGIONAL PROVIDENT FUND COMMISSIONER-II AND ANR ..... Respondents Through: Mr. Keshav Mohan, Advocate with Mr. Amit Vashist, Regional PF Commissioner (Legal)
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE J.R. MIDHA
%
O R D E R 02.12.2016
dated 28th October, 2016.
J.R. MIDHA, J.
DECEMBER 02, 2016 rsk
TECH MAHINDRA LTD
REGIONAL PROVIDENT FUND COMMISSIONER-II
J.R. MIDHA
As recorded by the court registry
A petition under Article 226 of the Constitution asking a High Court to issue a writ against the State or a public authority in a civil matter.
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
