Subhash Chand v. The Dte General Air India And ORS

* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of Order: May 21, 2018 + W.P.(C) 5495/2018 & CM No. 21398/2018 SUBHASH CHAND ..... Petitioner Through:

Ms. Minal Sehgal and Mr.

Prashant Sharma, Advocates versus THE DTE. GENERAL AIR INDIA & OTHERS .....Respondents Through:

Mr. Lalit Bhasin, Ms. Ratna Dwivedi Dhingra and Ms. Bhavna Dhami, Advocates Mr. Devesh Singh, ASC (Civil), GNCTD, for R-2 and 3.

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUNIL GAUR

O R D E R

(ORAL) Against attachment order of 18th April, 2018 (Annexure P-3), petitioner claims to have made a Representation (Annexure P-2) to first respondent on 9th April, 2018. According to petitioner's counsel, there is no response to the Representation (Annexure P-2). Learned counsel for petitioner relies upon Section 10 of The Employees' Provident Funds & Miscellaneous Provisions Act, 1952, to submit that provident fund of an employee cannot be attached. In the facts and circumstances of this case, it is deemed appropriate to dispose of this petition and the application with permission to file Representation against impugned Attachment Order (Annexure P-3) to

second respondent as well as to the first respondent within a week. If any such Representation is received by the respondents, then a speaking response thereto, be given within a period of four weeks and its fate be conveyed to petitioner within a week thereafter, so that petitioner may avail of the remedies as available in law, if need be. Till it is so done, let the Attachment Order of 18th April, 2018 (Annexure P-3) be kept in abeyance.

With the aforesaid directions, this petition and the application are accordingly disposed of.

Copy of this order be given dasti to learned counsel for the parties. (SUNIL GAUR) JUDGE MAY 21, 2018 p