The Thane Dist. Central Co-Op Bank Ltd. Through Its Authorised Representative v. The Regional Pf Commissioner-I (Exemption) And ANR.

1/3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION REVIEW PETITION NO.46 OF 2019 IN WRIT PETITION NO.10648 OF 2018 The Thane District Central Co-op.

....

Petitioner Bank Limited In the matter of The Thane District Central Co-op.

....

Petitioner Bank Limited (Thru' its authorised representative Mr. Dinesh Patil) Vs.

1. The Regional PF Commissioner-I (Exemption) 2 The Union of India ....

Respondents Dr. D.S. Hatle I/by Mr. Deepak P. Jamsandekar for the petitioner. Mr. Suresh Kumar for Respondent no.1.

Coram : Smt. Sadhana S. Jadhav, J.

Date : 16th April 2019 P.C.:

Heard.

The petitioner herein is seeking review of the order dated 1st October 2018. The paragraph 5 of the Review Petition reads as

2/3 follows :

"The order passed by this Hon'ble Court with the directions needs to be clarified, taking into consideration the probabilities thereof, which has been arose in view of the said order. In the event, the probabilities are not clarified, the very purpose of filing the writ petition and passing of the order by this Hon'ble Court would not serve the purpose in any manner whatsoever, which shall invite the multiple of litigations and therefore the present Review Petition is filed with a view to clarify the same".

The Review Petition is filed only in order to request this Court to consider contingencies and probabilities. The scope for review cannot be enhanced in such a manner under Article 227 of the Constitution of India. It is apparent on the face of the record that the petitioner herein has not approached the appropriate authority by filing any application either for seeking waiver or for restructuring the payments.

Learned counsel for the respondent submits that an application has been filed under Section 7(O) of the Provident Fund Act but has not been prosecuted. The order under review is dated 1st October 2018. There is no apparent error on the face of record.

3/3 The petitioner is placing reliance on some oral conversation with the officers of CGIT. The Court cannot consider the same as there is no material on record. There is no order passed by the respondent-authority to that effect. Hence, the Review Petition being sans-merits stands rejected.

( Smt. Sadhana S. Jadhav, J)