Petitioner establishment recovered funds and is defunct. Court dismissed writ petition maintaining that cause no longer survives.
Writ Petition dismissed; No costs.
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.
THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE NOOTY RAMAMOHANA RAO
WRIT PETITION No. 23596 of 1999
O R D E R:
When this Writ Petition was listed on 15.06.2010, none appeared for the writ petitioner. Hence, it was adjourned to 22.06.2010. On 22.06.2010 also, none appeared for the writ petitioner, but however, Sri R.N. Reddy, learned Standing Counsel for EPF Organization has brought to my notice that the entire money recoverable from the writ petitioner establishment towards the arrears of contribution of their employees has been recovered. It was also brought to my notice that the writ petitioner establishment has now become defunct and it is not functioning as such. Hence, this Writ Petition was posted for judgment today so as to enable the learned counsel for the writ petitioner to obtain necessary instructions. None appears even today on behalf of the writ petitioner.
In view of the statement made by the learned Standing Counsel for the respondents that the entire money recoverable from the writ petitioner establishment has already been recovered by the EPF Organization, in accordance with Section 8 of the Employees Provident Fund and Miscellaneous Provisions Act, 1952 and the fact that the writ petitioner establishment has become defunct, the cause in this Writ Petition does not survive any further.
Hence, the Writ Petition is dismissed. No costs.
---------------------------------(NOOTY RAMAMOHANA RAO, J)
29th June 2010
ksld
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Writ Petitioner Establishment
EPF Organization
Nooty Ramamohana Rao
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
