Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
S. M. SUBRAMANIAM, K. SURENDER, JJ
Central Board of Trustees Employees Provident Fund Rep. By Regional Provident Fund Commissioner-II – Appellant
Versus
Poppys Knitwear Pvt. Ltd. – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. factual background of epfo order and intra-court appeal (Para 1 , 2 , 3) |
| 2. parties contest writ maintainability by board of trustees (Para 4 , 5) |
| 3. epfo authorization and constitutional right to judicial review (Para 6 , 7 , 8 , 10) |
| 4. remand for merits hearing and final disposal of appeal (Para 11 , 12 , 13) |
[Made by S. M. SUBRAMANIAM, J.,]
By consent of both parties, the writ appeal is taken up for final hearing at the admission stage itself.
2. The present intra Court appeal has been instituted under Clause
15 of Letters Patent by the Central Board of Trustees, Employees Provident Fund, Rep. by Regional Provident Fund Commissioner II, challenging the order of the writ Court holding that the Board of Trustees, has no authority to maintain a writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India.
3. Uncontroverted facts between the parties would show that the competent authority under the Employees Provident Fund passed an order under Section 14B of the Act on 31.05.2016. Aggrieved by the said order, Establishment preferred an appeal before the Appellate Tribunal and the Appellate Tribunal entertained the appeal under Section 7-I of the Act and passed final orde
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
