M/S Jai Balaji Industries Ltd. v. Additional Central Provident Fund Commissioner

NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR Writ Petition (L) No. 221 of 2018 M/s Jai Balaji Industries Ltd. A Company Incorporated Under The Companies Act. 1956, Having Its Registered Office At 5, Betnick Street (West Bengal) Through Its Authorised Signatory, Mr. Sudhir Joshi, General Manager (HR & ADMIN), At Jai Balaji Industries Ltd. Durg, Chhattisgarh ---- Petitioner

Versus

1. The Additional Central Provident Fund Commissioner Bhavishyanidhi Bhawan, 59- Arera Hills, Bhopal, Madhya Pradesh.

2. The Regional Provident Fund Commissioner, Employees Provident Fund Organisation, Scheme No. 32, Plot-D, Indra Gandhi Commercial Complex, Pandri, Raipur, Chhattisgarh

3. Recovery Officer, Office Of The Recovery Officer, Employees Provident Fund Organisation, Scheme No. 32, Plot- D, Indra Gandhi Commercial Complex, Pandri, Raipur, Chhattisgarh ---- Respondents For Petitioner :

Shri Ankit Pandey, Advocate Hon'ble Shri Justice P. Sam Koshy Order On Board 09.10.2018 The limited grievance which the petitioner has made in the present writ petition is for a direction to respondent no.3 to take an appropriate decision on his application seeking grant of the facility of easy installment

for compliance of the order passed against the petitioner under the provisions of Rule 14 B and 7 Q of the EPF Act. 2.

Counsel for the petitioner submits that respondent no.3 on an earlier occasion on 26.07.2018 had directed the Accounts Officer, Recovery to consider the representation of the petitioner in accordance with the guidelines laid down by the Department so far as providing facility of installment is concerned.

3.

Taking into consideration the order passed by the Recovery Officer dated 26.07.2018, let an appropriate decision be taken in this regard by respondent no.3 on the representation so made at the earliest preferably within a period of 45 days from the date of receipt of the order passed by this Court. It shall be the responsibility of the petitioner to apprise respondent no.3 so far as the order passed by this Court is concerned. 4.

It is made clear that this Court has not expressed any opinion on the merits of the case, the authority concerned will be free to decide the same purely on merits.

5.

With the aforesaid observation, the writ petition stands disposed of. Sd/- P. Sam Koshy Judge Khatai