'-\,rf JJ -r $-* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI w. P. (c) 5301/2011 FOOD CORPORATION OF INDIA ""' Petitioner Through: Mr. Sukumar Pattjoshi with Mr. Satyajit Patra,\[r. S.K. DubeY, Advocates VETSUS REGIONAL PROVIDENT FUND COMMIS SIONER AND ORS ""' ResPondents Through: Mr. Arvind Kumar Sharma, Advocate with FOOD w. P. (c) 530212011 CORPORATION OF INDIA ..... Petitioner Through: Mr. Sukumar Pattjoshi with Mr. Satyajit Patra, Mr. S.K. DubeY, Advocates versus REGIONAL PROVIDENT FUND COMMIS SIONER AND ORS ..... ResPondents Through: Mr. Arvind Kumar Sharma, Advocate -5*. With \ w. P. (c) 5303/2011 FOOD CORPORATION OF INDIA ..... Petitioner Through: Mr. Sukumar Pattjoshi with Mr. Satyajit Patra,Mr. S.K. DubeY, Advocates 35 -r Digitally Signed By:AMULYA Signature Not Verified :- Z- VETSUS REGIONAL PROVIDENT FUND COMMIS SIONER AND ORS ""' ResPondents Through: IW. Arvind Kumar Sharma, Advocate with 36+ w. P. (c) s304l20rr FOOD CORPORATION OF INDIA ""' Petitioner Through: \zlr. Sukumar Pattjoshi with Mr. Satyajit versus REGIONAL PROVIDENT FI]ND COMMIS SIONER AND ORS ""' ResPondents Through: Mr. Arvind Kumar Sharma, Advocate with w. P. (c) s306/2011 FOOD CORPORATION OF INDIA ..... PEtitiONET Through: Mr. Sukumar Pattjoshi with Mr. Satyajit Patra, Mr. S.K. DubeY, Advocates ? versus REGIONAL PROVIDENT FI.]ND COMMIS SIONER AND ORS ..... ResPondents Through: Mr. Arvind Kumar Sharma, Advocate with 39-r W. P. (C) 5308/2011 38 + 40 4-+ FOOD CORPORATION OF INDIA ""' Petitioner Through: Mr. Sukumar Pattjoshi with Mr. Satyajit Patra,\,{r. S.K. DubeY, Advocates VETSUS REGIONAL PROVIDBNT FUND COMMIS SIONER AND ORS ..... ResPondents Through: Mr. Arvind Kumar Sharma, Advocate with w. P. (c) s310/2011 FOOD CORPORATION OF INDIA ""' Petitioner Through: Mr. Sukumar Pattjoshi with Mr. Satyajit Patra,Vlr. S.K. DubeY, Advocates VETSUS REGIONAL PROVIDENT FUND COMMIS SIONER AND ORS ..... ResPondents Through: Mr. Arvind Kumar Sharma, Advocate with w. P. (c) s311/2011 FOOD CORPORATION OF INDIA ..... Petitioner Through: Mr. Sukumar Pattjoshi with Mr. Satyajit Patra,\[r. S.K. Dubey, Advocates VETSUS REGIONAL PROVIDENT FI.]ND COMMIS SIONER AND ORS ..... ResPondents Through: IMr. Arvind Kumar Sharma, Advocate 4T + ? 1) q .F with 42+ 'w. P. (C) 5313/2011 FOOD CORPORATION OF INDIA ""' Petitioner Through: Mr. Sukumar Pattjoshi with Mr. Satyajit Patra,Vlr. S.K. DubeY, Advocates VETSUS REGIONAL PROVIDENT FUND COMMIS SIONER AND ORS ..... ResPondents Through: Mr. Arvind Kumar Sharma, Advocate with w. P. (c) 53l4l20ll FOOD CORPORATION OF INDIA ..... Petitioner Through: Mr. Sukumar Pattjoshi with Mr. Satyajit Patra,Mr. S.K. DubeY, Advocates VETSUS REGIONAL PROVIDENT FI.]ND COMMIS SIONER AND ORS ..... ResPondents Through: Mr. Arvind Kumar Sharma, Advocate And w. P. (c) s316/2011 FOOD CORPORATION OF INDIA ..... Petitioner Through: Mr. Sukumar Pattjoshi with hzlr. Satyajit Patra, Mr. S.K. DubeY, Advocates 43 + 44 + VETSUS REGIONAL PROVIDENT FUND COMMIS SIONER AND ORS ""' ResPondents Through: IMr. Arvind Kumar Sharma, Advocate CORAM: JUSTICE S. MURALIDHAR ORDER 28.07.201r CM APPLs 10759 & 10760/2011 in WP(O 5301/2011 62 & 107 011 in WP(C o AP 6s& CM APPLs 10768 & 10769/2011 in WP(O 5304/2011 :\ ./. e! Ls 1077 PPLs I & 1077 w s308/20 10778 & 1 f.inW s3l0l20 cM appr,r rozst c rozszlzort in wp(o srtuzort Cwr Apprs tOzSO & tOZgZlZOtt in Wp(C'l SStrlZOtt CM APPLs 10789 & 10790/20L1 in WP(O 5314/2011 cvt lppl,s tozga e tozgslzorr itr wp(o sst6lzort 11 i ln ln CM CM F)- Y Exemptions allowed subject to all just exceptions. The applications are disPosed of. cM APPL 107s8/2011 & WP(O s301/2011 cM APPL 10761/2011 & WP(O s302/2011 cM APPL 10764/2011 & WP(O s303/2011 cM APPL 10767/2011 & WP(O s304/2011 cM APPL 10770/2011 & WP(O s306/2011 cM APPL 1077412011 & WP(O s308/2011 cM APPL 1077712011 & WP(O s310/2011 cM APPL 10780/2011 & WP(O s311/2011 cM APPL 1078s/2011 & WP(O s313/2011 cM APPL 10788/2011 & WP(O s314l20L1 cM APPL 10793/2011 & WP(O s316/2011 1. These writ petitions challenge an order dated 25th April 20lI requiring the - e petitioner to deposit 40% of the demanded amount with the Regional Provident Fund Commissioner ('RPFC') as a condition for its appeal being considered by the Employees' Provident Fund Appellate Tribunal ('Tribunal'). 2. Having heard learned counsel for the Petitioner and having perused the records, this Cqurt is not inclined to interfere with the impugned order. O l{owever, the amounts when deposited by the Petitioner will be kept by the RPFC in a fixed deposit with a nationalized bank. If the Petitioner succeeds in the appeal, this deposit will be subject to the fuither orders that may be passed by the Tribunal. The time for the Petitioner depositing the amount before the RPFC is extended by eight weeks from today. 3. The petitions and the pending applications are disposed of. Order be given dasti to learned counsel for the Petitioner under signature of the Court C I\tlaster. JULY 28,2oll rk \4€Y? S. MT]RALIDHAR, J