Tuesday, 12, May, 2026
 
 
 
Expand O P Jindal Global University
 
  
  
 
 
 

Central Board Of Trustees ... vs M/S. Sylee Tea Estate & Anr
2022 Latest Caselaw 5844 Cal

Citation : 2022 Latest Caselaw 5844 Cal
Judgement Date : 24 August, 2022

Calcutta High Court (Appellete Side)
Central Board Of Trustees ... vs M/S. Sylee Tea Estate & Anr on 24 August, 2022
Item No.1.
               IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT CALCUTTA
                         CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
                                 APPELLATE SIDE


                                HEARD ON: 24.08.2022

                            DELIVERED ON:24.08.2022

                                      CORAM:

                  THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE T. S. SIVAGNANAM
                                        AND
         THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HIRANMAY BHATTACHARYYA


                               M.A.T. No.1842 of 2017
             [I.A. No.CAN 1 of 2018 (Old CAN 804 of 2018)] (not in file)

     Central Board of Trustees Employees' Provident Fund Organisation.
                                     Vs.
                         M/s. Sylee Tea Estate & anr.


Appearance:-
Mr. Anil Kumar Gupta                            .....     for the appellant.


                                    JUDGMENT

(Judgment of the Court was delivered by T.S. SIVAGNANAM, J.)

1. This intra-Court appeal by the Central Board of Trustees

Employees' Provident Fund Organisation is directed the against

the order dated 1st September, 2017 passed in W.P. No.20254(W) of

2017 by which the writ petition by the appellant was dismissed

on the ground that a writ petition at the instance of the

Central Board of Trustees Employees' Provident Fund Organisation

is not maintainable.

2. Identical issue was considered by us in a batch of cases,

Central Board of Trustees Vs. Registrar, E.P.F. Appellate

Tribunal & Anr. reported at 2022 SCC OnLine Cal 1219 :

(2022) 2 LLJ 93 and the appeals were allowed and the writ

petitions at the instance of the Central Board of Trustees

Employees' Provident Fund Organisation was held to be

maintainable. The operative portion of the judgment reads as

follows:-

"71. For all the above reasons, the appeals are allowed and the order passed in the writ petitions are set aside and the writ petitions at the instance of the Central Board of Trustees Employees' Provident Fund represented by the RPFC/APFC are maintainable and also writ petitions filed by the RPFC/APFC as a delegate of the Central Board are also maintainable. Consequently the writ petitions stand restored to file of the Learned Single

Bench to be heard and decided on merits and accordance with law. The respondent employers are directed to file their affidavit-in- opposition to the writ petitions raising their contentions on the merits of the matter except the ground of the maintainability which has been decided in favour of the appellant and such affidavit-in-opposition be filed within eight weeks from the date of receipt of the server copy of this order after serving copies thereof on the appellant and the appellants are granted four weeks time there from to file reply if any after which the Registry is directed to list the writ petitions for hearing before the appropriate Learned Single Bench. No Costs."

3. Thus, by following the above decision, this appeal is

allowed and the order passed in the writ petition is set aside

and it is held that the writ petition at the instance of the

Central Board of Trustees Employees' Provident Fund Organisation

is maintainable. Consequently, the writ petition stands

restored to the file of the Learned Single Bench to be heard and

decided on merits and in accordance with law.

4. The respondents are directed to file their affidavit-in-

opposition to the writ petition within eight weeks from date of

receipt of the server copy of this judgment and order after

serving copies thereof on the appellant. The appellant is

granted four weeks time therefrom to file reply, if any, after

which the Registry is directed to list the writ petition for

hearing before the appropriate Learned Single Bench.

5. There shall be no order as to costs.

6. Urgent photostat certified copy of this order, if applied

for, be furnished to the parties expeditiously upon compliance

of all legal formalities.

(T.S. SIVAGNANAM, J)

I agree,

(HIRANMAY BHATTACHARYYA, J.)

NAREN/PALLAB(AR.C)

 
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