M/S Tata Motors Limited vs The Regional Provident Fund ...
2023 Latest Caselaw 243 Jhar

                 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI

                                W.P.(C) No. 1616 of 2006

                M/s Tata Motors Limited                        ...        ...    Petitioner
                                         Versus
                The Regional Provident Fund Commissioner and Ors.
                                                    ...       ...     Respondents
                                         With
                                   W.P.(C). No.1856 of 2007
                M/s Tata Engineering and Locomotive Company Ltd.
                                                          ...   ...    Petitioner
                                         Versus
                The State of Jharkhand and Ors.     ...       ...     Respondents
                                         ---

CORAM: HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE ANUBHA RAWAT CHOUDHARY

---

For the Petitioner(s) : Mr. V.P Singh, Senior Advocate : Ms. Rashmi Kumar, Advocate For the Respondents : Mr. Sanjoy Piprawall, Advocate Mr. Anshuman Kumar, AC to SC (L&C) II : Mr. Rupesh Singh, Advocate : Mr. Amrendra Pradhan, Advocate

---

10/16.01.2023 I.A. No. 520 of 2007 in W.P.(C). No.1616 of 2006 Learned Senior counsel for the petitioner Mr. V.P Singh, submits that an interim order has already been passed in favour of the petitioner, but I.A. No.520 of 2007 has not been closed.

2. Considering the fact that interim order was passed in favour of the petitioner passed on 26.02.2007 and continued vide order dated 13.07.2012, no further order need be passed in I.A. No.520 of 2007, which is accordingly closed.

I.A. No.6623 of 2021 in W.P.(C). No.1616 of 2006

3. Mr. Rupesh Singh, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respondent authority submits that this interlocutory application has been filed for vacating the interim order dated 26.02.2007 or in the alternative for fixing an early date of hearing in the matter.

4. Learned Senior counsel for the petitioner while opposing the prayer has submitted that the interim order was ultimately passed on 13.07.2012 after hearing the counsel for the parties. He submits that the stay order may not be vacated.

5. After hearing the learned counsel for the parties and considering the alternative prayer made in I.A. No.6623 of 2021, this Court is of the considered view that the matter should be fixed for final disposal instead of vacating the order of stay.

6. Accordingly, I.A. No.6623 of 2021 is closed.

7. At this, learned Senior counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the matter can be fixed for final disposal in the 2 nd week of February, 2023.

8. Learned counsel for the parties are directed to prepare short synopsis of arguments, list of dates and the judgments on which they seek to rely upon latest by 03.02.2023.

I.A. No.1173 of 2007 in W.P.(C) No.1856 of 2007

9. Learned Senior counsel for the petitioner has submitted that through this interlocutory application, the petitioner has challenged the certificate proceeding in CC No.1 (Miscellaneous) / 06- 07 and is also seeking quashing of demand dated 09.04.2007 made by the Deputy Commissioner. He submits that the prayer sought for through this interlocutory application is arising out of same proceedings, which are involved in the present case. Learned counsel submits that accordingly this interlocutory application may be allowed. He also submits that if the present writ petition is allowed, the certificate proceeding will not survive.

10. Learned counsel for the respondents has opposed the prayer of the petitioner. However, no counter-affidavit to this interlocutory application has been filed.

11. After hearing the learned counsel for the parties and going through the averments made in interlocutory application, this Court is of the considered view that prayer made through I.A. No.1173 of 2007 is directly linked with the relief, which has been sought for by the petitioner in this writ petition.

12. Accordingly, I.A. No.1173 of 2007 is hereby allowed. Let the Interlocutory application be treated to be a part of the main writ petition.

13. Learned counsel for the respondents, if so advised, may file a supplementary counter-affidavit latest by 01.02.2023.

14. Learned counsel for the respondent - State Mr. Anshuman Kumar, submits that he does not have a copy of the brief of these cases.

15. Office is directed to provide a soft copy of the entire records of these cases to the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respondent - State at his following e-mail id. [email protected]

16. Post these cases on 09.02.2023.

(Anubha Rawat Choudhary, J.) Saurav/