No jurisdiction to condone appeal delay beyond 120 days under EPF Act Rule 7(2); statutory limit strictly enforceable, writ court cannot interfere.

By way of this writ petition, the petitioner has inter alia prayed for the following reliefs:-

“A. That the impugned order 21.08.2023 (Annexure-P- 3) of Hon'ble Central Government Industrial Tribunal-cum- Labour Court-1, Chandigarh passed in MA No. 15/2022 may kindly be set aside and the delay of 91 days in filing the appeal before the above authority may kindly be condoned in the interest of justice and the appeal may kindly be directed to be heard on merits.

B. Entire record of the case may kindly be ordered to be called for kind perusal of this Hon'ble Court.

C. That, further prayed that the order dated: 27.07.2022 (Annexure-P-1) passed under S. 7-A of the PF & MP Act, 1952 may kindly be set aside and the authority may kindly be directed to make a fresh inquiry in the matter by identifying the beneficiaries and considering the entire record presented/filed by the petitioner in a time bond manner as per direction of this Hon'ble Court.”

2. The petitioner is aggrieved by Annexure P-3, which is an order passed by Central Government Industrial Tribunal-cum- Labour Court, Chandigarh, dated 21.08.2023, in terms whereof an application filed by the petitioner for condonation of delay of 91 days in filing the appeal has been dismissed.

3. The facts necessary for the adjudication of this petition are as under:-

The petitioner herein suffered an order (Annexure P-1) passed by the Assistant Provident Fund Commissioner, dated 27.07.2022, under Section 7-A of the Employees Provident Funds and Miscellaneous Provisions Act, 1952 (hereinafter to be referred as ‘the 1952 Act’), in terms whereof the petitioner was directed to deposit the amount assessed therein within prescribed time as per the law laid down and procedure of the abovementioned Act and schemes framed thereunder.

4. Feeling aggrieved, the petitioner filed a statutory appeal, alongwith an application praying for condonation of delay of 91 days in filing the appeal.

5. In terms of the impugned order (Annexure P-3), this appeal has been dismissed by the learned Appellate Authority by returning the following findings:-

“4. It is admitted fact that the impugned order 27.07.2022 under Section 7 A of the EPF & MP Act, 1952 and this appeal has been preferred on 28.12.2022. The cause of delay in filing the appeal which has been mentioned by the appellant is unreliable. Any person who is doing any business and carrying on attending establishment his office cannot be shut down more than 6 or 7 month. Thus, from the perusal of submission and affidavit, it is apparent that a concocted and imaginary grounds have been created by the appellant. As the respondent has submitted that on the day which the order was passed it was communicated through e-mail and proof of e-mail which reached to the appellant is attached as Annexure R-1. Through replication, the appellant could not dare to deny the facts of respondent. As per Rule 7(2) of the Employees Provident Fund Appellate Tribunal (Procedure) Rules 1997, the appeal may within 60 days from the date of issue of the notification/order be file before the Tribunal. A proviso has also been attached by which another 60 days on sufficient cause the appeal may be preferred. It would be manifest that Rule 7(7) of the Rules prescribed the period of 60 days from the date of issuance of the notification/order to prefer the appeal before the Tribunal whereas the proviso 2 of the Rules empowers the Tribunal to extend a further period of 60 days it appellant shows sufficient cause from preferring the appeal within the prescribed time from the date of order and communication of order. Rather to say the appeal may be preferred within 120