Dismissed¶29

M/S.Heavy Engineering Corporat v. Employee Provident Fund Oragan

Jharkhand HC11 Mar 2024WPC/6235/2010

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Dismissal-for-default oral order; High Court of Jharkhand at Ranchi; M/s Heavy Engineering Corporation Ltd. v. EPFO, CPF Commissioner, RPFC Ranchi and Union of India; W. P. (C) Nos. 6235 & 3830 of 2010; petitioner absent on 16.01.2024 and again on 11.03.2024; both petitions dismissed for non-prosecution; no statutes, cited precedents, merits holdings, or amounts.

What did the court decide?

As the petitioner has lost interest in the cases and nobody appeared for it, granting further adjournment would serve no purpose. ¶27

M/S.Heavy Engineering Corporat Vs Employee Provident Fund Oragan — Jharkhand HC (2024) — LawSathi Research

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI

¶2

W. P. (C) No. 6235 of 2010

¶3

¶4

M/s Heavy Engineering Corporation Ltd., Ranchi … …. Petitioner

¶5

Versus

¶6

The Employees Provident Fund Organization under the Ministry of Labour and Employment, Government of India, New Delhi

¶7

The Central Provident Fund Commissioner-cum-Chairman, Central Board of Trustees, Employees Provident Fund Organization, New Delhi

¶8

The Regional Provident Fund Commissioner, Employee Provident Fund Organization, Regional Office, Ranchi

¶9

Union of India, through Ministry of Heavy Industries and Public Enterprises, Department of Heavy Industry, New Delhi … …. Respondents

¶10

With

¶11

W. P. (C) No. 3830 of 2010

¶12

¶13

M/s Heavy Engineering Corporation Ltd., Ranchi … …. Petitioner

¶14

Versus

¶15

The Employees Provident Fund Organization under the Ministry of Labour and Employment, Government of India, New Delhi

¶16

The Central Provident Fund Commissioner-cum-Chairman, Central Board of Trustees, Employees Provident Fund Organization, New Delhi

¶17

The Regional Provident Fund Commissioner, Employee Provident Fund Organization, Regional Office, Ranchi

¶18

Union of India, through Ministry of Heavy Industries and Public Enterprises, Department of Heavy Industry, New Delhi. … …. Respondents

¶19

¶20

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE GAUTAM KUMAR CHOUDHARY

¶21

¶22

For the Petitioner : None (In W. P. (C) Nos. 6235 & 3830 of 2010 ) For the Respondent-EPFO : Mr. Rupesh Singh, Advocate For the Bank : Mr. Pratiyush Kumar, Advocate For the UOI : Mr. Anil Kumar, ASGI -----

¶23

Oral Order

¶24

07 / Dated : 11.03.2024

¶25

None appeared on behalf of the petitioner in both cases.

¶26

On 16.01.2024 also, nobody had appeared in these cases.

¶27

It appears that the petitioner has lost interest in the cases and it will no purpose

¶28

for granting further adjournment.

¶29

Accordingly, both the writ petitions stand dismissed for default on account of

¶30

non-prosecution.

¶31

(Gautam Kumar Choudhary, J.)

¶32

AKT/Satendra

¶33

Uploaded

M/S.Heavy Engineering Corporat v. Employee Provident Fund Oragan

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

M/S.Heavy Engineering Corporat v. Employee Provident Fund Oragan

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Om Prakash Sinha Vs State of Jharkhand through CBI

Harish Chandra Mahto Vs the State of Jharkhand

Binod Oraon Vs State of Jharkhand

Heavy Engineering Corporation Limited through Sri Amit Kumar Srivastava Vs Union of India through Its Secretary Ministry of Labour and Employment

Raju Das Vs The State Of Jharkhand

Pravir Garg Vs State of Jharkhand And Ors.