Central Board Of Trustees ... vs M/S. Durgapur Chemicals Limited & ...
2022 Latest Caselaw 7280 Cal

Item No.1.
             IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT CALCUTTA
                       CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
                              APPELLATE SIDE


                             HEARD ON: 31.10.2022

                          DELIVERED ON:31.10.2022

                                   CORAM:

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


                            M.A.T No.1195 of 2017
         [I.A. No.CAN 1 of 2017 (Old CAN 8128 of 2017)] (not in file)

      Central Board of Trustees Employees' Provident Fund Organisation.
                                     Vs.
                   M/s. Durgapur Chemicals Limited & anr.


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

Mr. Ranjay De,
Mr. B. Banerjee                              ...... for the respondent no.1.


                                 JUDGMENT

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

1. It is found that there is a delay of 3 days in preferring

the instant appeal.

2. Having heard Mr. Anil Kumar Gupta, learned Advocate

appearing for the appellant and Mr. Ranjay De, learned Advocate

appearing for the respondent no.1, we are of the considered view

that although there is no formal application for condoning the

delay in filing the appeal but for the sake of justice, we

condone the delay in filing the appeal.

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

Employees' Provident Fund Organisation is directed against the

order dated 16th May, 2017 passed in a batch of writ petitions

(W.P. No.25089(W) of 2016), the lead case of which is W.P.

No.17597(W) of 2016. By the said order, the writ petitions

filed by the appellant/writ petitioner was dismissed on the

ground that writ petitions at the instance of the Central Board

of Trustees Employees' Provident Fund Organisation are not

maintainable.

4. 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."

5. Thus, by following the above decision, this appeal along

with the application [I.A. No.CAN 1 of 2017 (Old CAN 8128 of

2017)] (not in file) are 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.

6. 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.

7. There shall be no order as to costs.

8. 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)