SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

DELHI HIGH COURT
DINESH KUMAR SHARMA
NTPC Limited – Appellant
Versus
Regional Provident Fund Commissioner-II – Respondent


Table of Content
1. nature of employment and employer relationship (Para 1 , 2 , 3 , 4 , 5 , 6)
2. status of club regarding employees (Para 7)
3. legal arguments on employer liability (Para 8 , 9 , 10 , 11 , 12)
4. scope of judicial review in employment disputes (Para 13 , 14)
5. reaffirmation of prior findings on employment (Para 16)
6. disposal of petition with right to challenge (Para 17 , 18)

JUDGMENT

Dinesh Kumar Sharma, J. (Oral)--Present writ petition has been filed challenging the order dated 13.07.2011 passed by the Employees provident Fund Appellate Tribunal (hereinafter referred to as `the learned Tribunal) in ATA No.869 (4)09 under Section 7-I of the Employees Provident Funds and Miscellaneous Provisions Act, 1952 wherein the learned tribunal inter alia held that NTPC being the principle employer is liable to pay provident fund contribution to the claimant/workman. The petitioner has assailed this finding that this finding of the learned tribunal as well the finding of the Regional Provident Fund Commissioner (RPFC) on the ground that they are contrary to the record and orders of the CGIT passed in ID No.25/2009 titled as Umesh Kumar Mishra vs. General Manager, BTPS.

2. The

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top