Disposed

M/S Evershine Housekeeping Services (Regd.) v. Harish Gupta, Presiding Officer Epfat & Anr.

Delhi HC4 Mar 2016W.P.(C)/1629/2016

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In this writ petition, the Delhi High Court disposed of challenges against EPFAT orders by directing the Tribunal to decide a review application within one month. The court granted liberty to the petitioner to seek a stay on recovery orders while moving a draft representing a specific deposit amount.

What did the court decide?

Direction to EPFAT to decide review application within one month; liberty to petitioner to move for stay with draft of Rs.36,10,000/-.

M/S Evershine Housekeeping Services (Regd.) Vs… — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Delhi HC (2016)

¶1

$~1

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

¶3

W.P.(C) 1629/2016 & C.M. Appl. No. 7051/2016

¶4

M/S EVERSHINE HOUSEKEEPING SERVICES (REGD.)..... Petitioner

¶5

Through: Mr.S.P. Arora and Mr. Rajiv Arora, Advocates

¶6

versus

¶7

HARISH GUPTA, PRESIDING OFFICER EPFAT & ANR..... Respondents Through: Mr.Keshav Mohan and Mr.Piyush Choudhary, Advocates

¶8

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE V.P.VAISH

¶9

O R D E R % 04.03.2016

¶10

By way of present petition under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India the petitioner seeks quashing of orders dated 22.12.2015 and 19.11.2015 passed by the learned Presiding Officer, Employees Provident Funds Appellate Tribunal (in short ‘EPFAT’), in ATA No. 1320(4) 2015 titled ‘Evershine House Keeping Services vs. APFC, Delhi (N)’ .

¶11

Mr.S.P. Arora, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that EPFAT has passed an order dated 19.11.2015 and the petitioner moved an application under Section 7L(2) of the Employees’ Provident Funds and Miscellaneous Act, 1952 (in short ‘the Act’) for review of the order dated 19.11.2015 and also for compliance of the order dated 08.12.2015. He also submits that the petitioner moved an application dated 23.12.2015 seeking

¶12

extension of time. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that both the applications are pending and the next date of hearing is 28.03.2015. He further submits that petitioner is suffering great hardship.

¶13

Learned counsel for the petitioner further submits that vide order dated 19.11.2015, Presiding Officer, EPFAT stayed the operation of orders dated 31.08.2015 and 08.10.2015 subject to petitioner’s depositing 40% of the assessed amount. Learned counsel for the petitioner also submits that a sum of Rs.31,15,257/- and Rs.65,336/- has already been attached by the respondent. He also submits that the petitioner is ready to deposit a sum of Rs.36,10,000/- and after deposit of said amount it would come to 40% as directed by EPFAT vide order dated 19.11.2015.

¶14

Learned counsel for the petitioner further submits that the petitioner would be satisfied if the application of the petitioner dated 08.01.2016 under Section 7L(2) of the Act is decided in a time bound manner. He also submits that the petitioner will move an application for stay of the orders dated 31.08.2015 and 08.01.2016 under Section 7A and 7B of the Act.

¶15

Mr. Keshav Mohan, learned counsel for the respondents on advance notice submits that he has no objection if the application of the petitioner is decided at an early date.

¶16

In view of the facts and circumstances of the case, it is deemed appropriate to dispose of the present petition as well as application with directions that EPFAT will decide the application dated 08.01.2016 under Section 7L(2) of the Act within one month from today. Both the parties are directed to appear before EPFAT on 11.03.2016 at 11:00AM. However, the petitioner is at liberty to move an application for stay of the orders dated 31.08.2015 and 08.01.2016 under Section 7A and 7B of the Act along with

¶17

draft amounting Rs.36,10,000/- and the same will be considered by the learned EPFAT within a period of two days of moving the application. In view of the above, the petition and the application stand disposed

of.

Dasti .

V.P.VAISH, J

MARCH 04, 2016 /hkaur

M/S Evershine Housekeeping Services (Regd.) v. Harish Gupta, Presiding Officer Epfat & Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

M/S Evershine Housekeeping Services (Regd.) v. Harish Gupta, Presiding Officer Epfat & Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Narendra Singh Vs Union of India & Ors.

Shribhagwan Sharma and Ors. Vs Registrar Cooperative Societies and Ors.

East Delhi Municipal Corporation & Ors. Vs Vinai Kumar Srivastav & Anr.

Dr. Ajit Gupta Vs Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax

Suman Kumar Vs Union of India & Ors.

The Shivlok Co-Operative Group Housing Society Ltd. Vs Registrar Co-Operative Societies

Ravi Shankar Sahu Vs Jawaharlal Nehru University

Inderjit Banga Vs Registrar, Coop. Societies, Govt. of NCT of Delhi & Ors.

M/S Novelty Cinema Vs the Workmen of M/S Novelty Cinema & Anr.

Central Board of Trustees, through Regional Provident Fund Commissioner Vs Chandigargh Medical and Research Centre & Anr.

Pawan Garg & Ors. Vs Shamsher Singh & Ors.

Alok Ranjan Vs CBI

Sewa International Fashion Pvt. Ltd. and Anr. Vs Maya Rawat and Ors.

Sewa International Fashion Pvt. Ltd. and Anr. Vs Nasrullah and Anr.