M/S Myrada Vs the Regional Pf Commissioner-Ii… — Writ and Judicial Review | Karnataka HC (2025)

M/S Myrada Vs the Regional Pf Commissioner-Ii… — Writ and Judicial Review | Karnataka HC (2025)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Petition disposed of; the interim stay of the impugned attachment order (granted on 30.11.2022 subject to deposit of 25% of the demand, which the petitioner has deposited) shall continue until the tribunal considers the application for interim protection; petitioner left free to seek any relief before the tribunal.

Issue for consideration

Whether the High Court should proceed with the writ petition challenging the order of attachment dated 26.10.2022 when the petitioner has already preferred an appeal against the very same order (passed under Section 7A) before the CGIT, which tribunal is now functioning.

Court's answer

In view of the resumption of duties and the tribunal functioning, it would serve no purpose for this Court to proceed in the matter; the petitioner can agitate all his grievances, so also the contentions and grounds urged in the petition, before the Tribunal.

Ratio / Principle

The interim order so granted by this Court shall continue till the application for interim protection is considered by the tribunal in accordance with law.

Key takeaways

The petitioner is at liberty to move necessary application before the tribunal for seeking relief whatsoever; the same shall be considered in accordance with law.ratio¶34

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Writ petition under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India, 1950 by M/s. Myrada (NGO) seeking quashing of an order of attachment dated 26.10.2022 (No.RO/KRP/COMPL/DIV6/35939/202223/3491, Annexure-D) passed by the respondent authority. Counsel for Respondent No.1 filed a memo pointing out that the petitioner had already preferred an appeal against the very same impugned order (passed under Section 7A) before the Central Government Industrial Tribunal (CGIT), which was vacant when the petition was filed, and that the tribunal had since resumed functioning. Holding it unnecessary to proceed, the Court disposed of the petition, directed that its interim order of 30.11.2022 (stay of the impugned order subject to deposit of 25% of the demand, duly deposited and not in dispute) continue until the tribunal considers the application for interim protection in accordance with law, and left the petitioner at liberty to move the tribunal for any relief, to be considered in accordance with law.

1 -

NC: 2025:KHC:34517 WP No. 23774 of 2022

HC-KAR

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 2^ND DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2025

BEFORE

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PRADEEP SINGH YERUR WRIT PETITION NO. 23774 OF 2022 (L-PF)

BETWEEN:

M/S. MYRADA, NO.2, SERVICE ROAD, DOMLUR LAYOUT, BANGALORE - 560 071. REP. BY ITS EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR (NON-GOVERNMENT ORGANISATION)

…PETITIONER

(BY SRI PRASHANTH B.R., ADVOCATE)

AND:

THE REGIONAL PF COMMISSIONER-II, EMPLOYEES' PROVIDENT FUND ORGANIZATION, REGIONAL OFFICE, K.R.PURAM, NO.F-28, NSU BLOCK, ITI CAMPUS(BENGALURU PLANT), DOORAVANI NAGAR, BENGALURU - 560 016.

Digitally signed by B LAVANYA Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA

THE BRANCH MANAGER, VIJAYA BANK, (ERSTWHILE KNOWN AS BANK OF BARODA) DOMLUR BRANCH, BANGALORE - 560 071.

…RESPONDENTS

(BY SMT. NANDITHA D.HALDIPUR, ADVOCATE FOR R1; SRI K.N.MAHABALESHWAR RAO, ADVOCATE FOR R2)

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, 1950 PRAYING TO QUASH THE IMPUGNED ORDER OF ATTACHMENT DATED 26.10.2022 BEARING NO.RO/KRP/COMPL/DIV6/35939/202223/3491 VIDE ANNEXURE-D PASSED BY THE RESPONDENT AUTHORITY.

2 -

NC: 2025:KHC:34517 WP No. 23774 of 2022

HC-KAR

THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PRADEEP SINGH YERUR

ORAL ORDER

Learned counsel for petitioner and learned counsel for respondents are present.

Learned counsel for respondent No.1 has filed a memo seeking disposal of this matter on the ground that the petitioner has already preferred an appeal challenging the very same impugned order passed under Section 7A before the Central Government Industrial Tribunal (CGIT). In view of the vacancy of the Court, the petitioner has preferred the present petition.

It is submitted by a memo that the tribunal is now functioning. Under the circumstances, the appeal could be agitated by the petitioner before the tribunal.

Learned counsel for petitioner submits that after filing the present writ petition, he was beneficiary of an interim order passed by this Court on 30.11.2022, whereby this Court stayed the impugned order subject to deposit of 25% of the demand made by the notice dated 26.10.2022 and accordingly, he has

3 -

NC: 2025:KHC:34517 WP No. 23774 of 2022

HC-KAR

deposited the said amount before the Authority, which is not in dispute.

However, in view of the resumption of duties and the tribunal functioning, it would serve no purpose for this Court to proceed in this matter, as the petitioner can agitate all his grievances, so also the contentions and grounds urged herein before the Tribunal.

The interim order so granted by this Court shall continue till the application for interim protection is considered by the tribunal in accordance with law.

The petitioner is at liberty to move necessary application before the tribunal for seeking relief whatsoever; the same shall be considered in accordance with law.

Accordingly, the petition is disposed of .

Sd/(PRADEEP SINGH YERUR) JUDGE

CPN List No.: 1 Sl No.: 4