>INGIE 8FNCH ^1?&^^2 ^^^ss^--"^ ^ v"" \v-1-1 A»^.-- BEFORE THE HON'BLE HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH ATBILASPUR W.P.< /2006 V— Surendra Surana, S/o Shri Dev Raj Surana, 36/1, Byron Bazar, Raipur. Ex Partner of M/s Amar Chemicals, 6-A, Heavy Industrial Area, Hathkhoj, Bhilai Distt.Durg (C.G) Vs. 1. c. .PETITIONER Union of India Through Secretary Sharm Shakti Bhawn New Delhi @htiSwN__ ^OAY SINGH £?.t.^lK:it°LGen?l'alof'lndia" «CHHAT?SGARHW"counT 8,Blla*|)ur(C.G.) ^2. ft Assistant. Provident Fund Commissioner Office ofthe Employees Provident Fund Organization Regional Office Block D, Scheme No. 32, Indira Gandhi Commercial Complex Raipur (Chhattisgarh) Devendra Nagar, Pandri, Raipur (Chhattisgarh) 3. Regional Provident Fund Commissioner Office of the Employees Provident Fund Organization Regional Office Block D, Scheme No. 32, Indira Gandhi Commercial Complex, Devendra Nagar, Pandri, Raipur (Chhattisgarh RESPONDENTS The Petitioner named above most humbly submits as under: 1. PARTICULARS OF THE PETITIONER As mentioned in the cause title 2. Particulars of Respondent: As mentioned in the cause title 3. PARTICUI.ARSOF THE ORDBR AGAINST WHICH PETITIQN IS FILED : (i) Notice/Order dated 7/7/2006 by •'vhich respondent No.3 has directed the petitioner to c'eposit Rs.4,58,287=00 XI-HC-78 *11+IMI Sh+<|cb 3ST -^WW^, •,S-^[w\if, [S«11dy ^^.Wf.t^.46e.<1...^2oo^ an^rq^F (yit^8*^) sn^fT^rfera; OTrsn^Tstiii* •I.:-'. Bawe ??(iTWfff5<rw^?r ^rafepfrr wicfffffec^ tRiTKR ^sf^ffsn^r 21-7-2006:- Shri N.K. Vyas, counsel fbr tl|ie petitioner. Shri Pradeep Saxena, cou^sel for respondents No.2 and 3, on advance copy. * Heard both the counsel. Leamed counsel for the pet^tioner submitted that even though Uie petitioner has already preferred a^ appeal under Section 7 (1) of the Employees' Provident Funds and before the Tribunal at New Delhi b|jt no presiding ofRcer is posted in the Tribunal, therefore, per force, the p^titioner has to file this writ petition. Having heard learned counsi petition has been filed, it is directecf Miscetlaneous Provisions ^t, 1952 for the parties and having regard to the fact that the Tribunat is withoi|t presiding ofRcer, therefore, ttiis writ that on depositing 75% ofttie amount ascertained by the Regional Provfdent Fund Commissioner, execution and implementation of the ord^r of the Regional Provident Fund Commissioner shall remain stayed], till the presiding offieer is appointed and he starte functioning. With Uie direction aforesakt, jhe petition stands dteposed of. Consequently, M.O<V.)P. No.^797/2006 also stands disposed of. Parties are entitled for certifi^d copy of this orcler. Sd/- L.C.Bhadoo Judge P.T.O.