Nasik Jilha Mahila Vikas Sahakari Bank Ltd. v. Regional Provident Fund Commissioner Ii And ANR.

17 wp 14352-16 grp=.doc FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY.

CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION.

WRIT PETITION NO. 14352 OF 2016 WITH WRIT PETITION NO. 2080 OF 2017 WITH WRIT PETITION NO. 2130 OF 2017 WITH WRIT PETITION NO. 14353 OF 2016 WITH WRIT PETITION NO. 14354 OF 2016 WITH WRIT PETITION NO. 31295 OF 2016 Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, Appearances, court's orders or directions and Registrar's orders Court's or Judge's orders Mr. Mahaling Pandarge with Mr. Chaitanya Jadhav i/b Ravindra lokhande for the Petitioner.

Ms. Sangeeta Yadav i/b Suresh Kumar for the Respondents.

CORAM : K. K. TATED, J.

DATED : 02/03/2017 P.C.:

.

Heard learned Counsel for the parties.

The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the issue involved in the present Writ Petitions is already covered by the earlier order dated 30.01.2017 in Writ Petition No. 39 of 2017 arising same group of matters. This fact is not disputed by the learned counsel for the Respondents.

Considering this fact and reasons given in Sneha Chavan 1/2

17 wp 14352-16 grp=.doc order dated 30.01.2017, all these Writ Petitions are disposed of as under:

a) The Restoration applications for restoring all appeals preferred by the petitioner before the Employees Provident Fund Appellate Tribunal challenging the order under Section 7A of the Employees Provident Fund and Miscellaneous Provisions Act, 1952 are allowed.

b) All Appeals preferred by the petitioner in these Petitions before the Employees Provident Fund Appellate Tribunal at New Delhi are restored on file.

c) The Employees Provident Fund Appellate Tribunal at New Delhi to decide all the appeals filed by the petitioner on its own merits. d) All Writ Petitions are disposed of accordingly.

(K.K.TATED, J.) Sneha Chavan 2/2