Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA
AJAY MOHAN GOEL
Municipal Council, Bilaspur – Appellant
Versus
Regional Provident Fund Commissioner – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
Ajay Mohan Goel, J.
By way of this petition filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner has assailed the order passed by the Reviewing Authority dated 31.01.2023, in terms whereof the review petition preferred by the petitioner against the order passed by the Authority dated 30.07.2022, stands rejected.
2. Learned Counsel for the petitioner has assailed the order on two grounds. He submitted that the impugned order is not sustainable for the reason that the order dated 30.07.2022 was passed by the Assistant Provident Fund Commissioner, whereas the review order is passed by different authority, i.e. the Regional Provident Fund Commissioner-II. Learned Counsel has further argued that the impugned order is not sustainable in the eyes of law for the reason it has been issued without hearing the petitioner.
3. On the other hand, learned Counsel for the respondents has submitted that there is no merit in the present petition for the reason that after the transfer of Shri Gulshan Ram, Assistant Provident Fund Commissioner, on 16.08.2022, the work of office of the Assistant Provident Fund Commissioner was being looked after by the Regional Provident Fund Com
Authorities must adhere to principles of natural justice and provide opportunities for hearing in quasi-judicial proceedings, especially in review applications.
The right to be heard is fundamental; dismissal of a Review Application without a hearing violates natural justice principles.
The court emphasized that review applications under the Act must afford an opportunity for hearing to the aggrieved party, reinforcing principles of natural justice.
The main legal point established is that orders passed under Section 7-A of the Employees’ Provident Funds and Miscellaneous Provisions Act, 1952 are appealable under Section 7-I, and the power of re....
The rejection of a review application does not eliminate the right to appeal against the original order under Section 7A of the Act.
The court established that procedural fairness requires a party to have a full opportunity to present their case, without being bound by prior prejudicial findings during ongoing proceedings.
Judicial discretion to allow alternate remedies under statutory provisions while excluding limitation periods.
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
