Thursday, 30, Apr, 2026
 
 
 
Expand O P Jindal Global University
 
  
  
 
 
 

M/S Shri Sant Gajanan Nagri ... vs Asst. Provident Fund ...
2021 Latest Caselaw 3412 Bom

Citation : 2021 Latest Caselaw 3412 Bom
Judgement Date : 23 February, 2021

Bombay High Court
M/S Shri Sant Gajanan Nagri ... vs Asst. Provident Fund ... on 23 February, 2021
Bench: V.M. Deshpande
Judgment

                                                                 wp5075.17 14

                                       1

        IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY,
                   NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR

                     WRIT PETITION NO.5075 OF 2017


M/s.Shri Sant Gajanan Nagri Sahakari
Patsanstha, Maryadit, Sahakar Nagar, LIC
Office Road, Warud, District Amravati.              ..... Petitioner.

                                :: V E R S U S ::

Assistant Provident Fund Commissioner,
Office of Assistant Provident Commissioner,
Sub Regional Office, Akola.                 ..... Respondent.

===================================
Shri N.R.Saboo, Counsel for the petitioner.
Shri H.N.Verma, Counsel for the respondent.
===================================

                CORAM           : V.M.DESHPANDE, J.
                DATE            : FEBRUARY 23, 2021

ORAL JUDGMENT

1.             On 3.8.2017, notice was issued in this writ petition.

The respondent is duly served. This writ petition is filed seeking

quashment of order dated 16.6.2017 passed under Section 7B and

order dated 22.6.2016 passed under Section 7A of the Employees'

Provident Funds and Miscellaneous Provisions Act, 1952 (for short,


                                                                         .....2/-




 ::: Uploaded on - 24/02/2021                       ::: Downloaded on - 24/02/2021 23:24:20 :::
 Judgment

                                                               wp5075.17 14

                                      2

"the Act of 1952") by the Assistant Provident Fund Commissioner,

Sub Regional Office, Akola.


2.              After hearing learned counsel Shri N.R.Saboo for the

petitioner and learned counsel Shri H.N.Verma for the respondent,

I am of view that this writ petition can be disposed of at admission

stage itself.     Rule.     Rule is made returnable forthwith.         Heard

finally by consent of learned counsel for parties.


3.              The petitioner is a registered society registered under

the provisions of the Maharashtra Cooperative Societies Act.

Undisputedly, the petitioner is authorized to function as banking

society. The petitioner is carrying activities of credit cooperative

society.    According to the petitioner, the society is having six

employees on its pay roll and the society is also taking assistance

of 15 persons who were appointed as pigmy agents. According to

the petitioner, function of these pigmy agents is to collect daily

saving of persons who are having accounts with the petitioner

society and to deposit daily collection with the petitioner.


                                                                       .....3/-




 ::: Uploaded on - 24/02/2021                     ::: Downloaded on - 24/02/2021 23:24:20 :::
 Judgment

                                                                          wp5075.17 14

                                                 3

According to the petitioner, pigmy agents are not employees of

petitioner society but they are compensated by making payments

as commission.


4.                 The question, the petitioner is raising, is that whether

these pigmy agents can be treated as employees of the society and

whether provisions of the Act of 1952 can be made applicable or

not.


5.                 Learned counsel for parties invited my attention to

judgment delivered by this Court (Coram : Manish Pitale, J.) on

25.4.2019           in    a    bunch        of   writ   petitions    (Writ      Petition

No.5154/2016              and       other    connected     petitions)     and      more

particularly to paragraph Nos.21 and 28 of the said judgment.

Perusal of paragraph No.28 shows that this Court (Coram : Manish

Pitale, J.) in view of Division Bench judgment in the case of

Pachora Peoples' Cooperative Bank Ltd. vs. Employees Provident

fund Organization, reported at 2014(4) Mh.L.J. 436 remanded

matter back for proper enquiry. It would be useful to reproduce


                                                                                  .....4/-




     ::: Uploaded on - 24/02/2021                            ::: Downloaded on - 24/02/2021 23:24:20 :::
 Judgment

                                                                     wp5075.17 14

                                            4

paragraph           No.28      of   the   said   judgment   in   Writ      Petition

No.5154/2016 as under:


                    "In the light of the above, this Court is of the
                    opinion that the writ petitions in the present
                    case deserve to be partly allowed and all the
                    cases deserve to be remanded to the Provident
                    Fund Commissioner for undertaking enquiry
                    under Section 7-A of the Act of 1952, on the
                    parameters laid down by the Division Bench of
                    this court in the case of Pachora People's Co-
                    op. Bank Ltd. vs. Employees Provident Fund
                    Organization (supra) quoted above, including
                    on the question of the applicability of the Act
                    of 1952 to the banks/employers in the present
                    case as mandated under section 7-A(1)(a) of
                    the Act of 1952."


6.                 In this view of the matter, I pass following order:


                                          ORDER

(1) Orders dated 16.6.2017 and 22.6.2016 passed under Section

7B and 7A respectively is hereby quashed and set aside.

(2) The dispute is remanded back to the Assistant Provident Fund

Commissioner, Akola to undertake enquiry under 7A of the 1952

.....5/-

Judgment

wp5075.17 14

Act in the light of parameters laid down by the Division Bench of

this Court in review in the case of Pachora Peoples' Cooperative

Bank Ltd. vs. Employees Provident fund Organization cited supra.

Rule is made absolute in above terms. No costs.

JUDGE

!! BRW !!

...../-

 
Download the LatestLaws.com Mobile App
 
 
Latestlaws Newsletter
 

Publish Your Article

 

Campus Ambassador

 

Media Partner

 

Campus Buzz

 

LatestLaws Guest Court Correspondent

LatestLaws Guest Court Correspondent Apply Now!
 

LatestLaws.com presents: Lexidem Offline Internship Program, 2026

 

LatestLaws.com presents 'Lexidem Online Internship, 2026', Apply Now!

 
 

LatestLaws Partner Event : IJJ

 

LatestLaws Partner Event : Smt. Nirmala Devi Bam Memorial International Moot Court Competition

 
 
Latestlaws Newsletter