The Court disposed of the writ petition by observing that the statutory remedy of appeal remains effective despite the petitioner's circumstances, thereby denying the writ relief.
Writ petition disposed of with liberty to the petitioner to avail the statutory remedy of appeal.
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 S. V. BHATT
WRIT PETITION No.10834 OF 2015
Date:16.04.2015
Between:
M/s. Radha Realty Corporation India Private Limited, Formerly known as M/s. Radha Realtors Private Limited, Having its Registered Office situated at # 6-3-609/96/A, Anand Nagar Colony, Khairatabad, Hyderabad, rep., by its Authorized Officer/Director Sri Y. Ashok .. Petitioner
And The Central Provident Fund Commissioner, Bhavishya Nidhi Bhawan, 14 Bhikaiji Cama Place, New Delhi and others .. Respondents
THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE S. V. BHATT
WRIT PETITION No.10834 OF 2015
ORDER:
Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Standing Counsel for the
respondents.
Admittedly, against the order impugned in the Writ Petition, the statutory remedy of appeal is available to the petitioner. Learned counsel for the petitioner, however, tried to persuade this Court with the similar circumstances and the piquant situation in which the petitioner is placed. These circumstances even if taken note of by this Court, the remedy of appeal cannot be considered as an ineffective remedy.
By giving liberty to the petitioner of availing the remedy of appeal, the Writ Petition is disposed of. No order as to costs.
Miscellaneous petitions, if any, pending in this Writ Petition shall stand closed.
S. V. BHATT, J
Date:16.04.2015
KH
M/s. Radha Realty Corporation India Private Limited
The Central Provident Fund Commissioner
S. V. BHATT
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
