Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
D.BHARATHA CHAKRAVARTHY, J
M/s.K.R.T.A.Varatharaj Educational and Charitable Trust, in R/o.Renganayagi Engineering, Salvarpatti-Thayilpatti Post, Virudhunagar District, Through its Secretary – Appellant
Versus
The Assistant Provident Fund Commissioner, Employees Provident Fund Organisation, District Office, AKM Complex, Old Virudhunagar Road, Sivakasi- 625 189. – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. challenge to the central government tribunal's order. (Para 1 , 2) |
| 2. procedural rules for appeals and restoration. (Para 3 , 4) |
ORDER
The writ petition is filed challenging the order of the Central Government Industrial Tribunal cum Labour Court, Chennai, dated 08.01.2026 passed in M.P.No.103 of 2025 in E.P.F.A.No.143 of 2023 and to quash the same.
2. The E.P.F.A.No. 143 of 2023 was filed by the petitioner herein and it was dismissed for default on 06.11.2025. As per Rule 15 of the Employees’ Provident Fund Appellate Tribunal (Procedure) Rules, 1997, any appeal which was dismissed for default can be restored to file if the appellant thereafter appears and satisfies the Tribunal that there was sufficient cause for his non- appearance. The said application has to be filed within a period of 30 days. There is no express provision for entertaining a condone delay application and stating so, the M.P. No.103 of 2025 filed by the appellant to condone the delay of 14 days in filing the application to restore the appeal back to file was dismissed by the Tribunal.
3. Mr.P.K.Paneer Selvam, the learned counsel taking notice on behalf of the respondent would submit that as per R
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
