Mahagun India Pvt Limited v. Regional Provident Fund Commissioner

Delhi High Court · 06 Jul 2026 · 2026:DHC:5447
Mini Pushkarna
W.P.(C) 8245/2026
2026:DHC:5447
administrative appeal_allowed

AI Summary

The Delhi High Court allowed the petitioner time to comply with the pre-deposit order, revived the statutory appeal, and clarified deposit procedures in a provident fund dispute.

Full Text
Translation output
HIGH COURT OF DELHI
Date of Decision: 06th July, 2026
W.P.(C) 8245/2026 & CM APPL. 39018/2026, CM APPL.
39019/2026 MAHAGUN INDIA PVT LIMITED .....Petitioner
Through: Mr. S.K. Gupta, Mr. Raj Kumar, Mr. Harish Verma, Advocates
(M:9891170907)
VERSUS
REGIONAL PROVIDENT FUND COMMISSIONER.....Respondent
Through: Mr. B. B. Pradhan, Advocate (M:9891357195)
CORAM:
HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE MINI PUSHKARNA MINI PUSHKARNA, J (ORAL):
JUDGMENT

1. The present writ petition has been filed seeking quashing of the order dated 29th April, 2026, passed by the Presiding Officer, Central Government Industrial Tribunal (“CGIT”)-cum-Labour Court, Delhi-1 in Appeal No. D- 1/23/2024, titled as M/s Mahagun India Pvt. Ltd. versus Regional Provident Fund Commissioner, Delhi East, whereby, the statutory appeal of the petitioner had been dismissed for non-compliance of the pre-deposit order dated 01st December, 2025.

2. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is ready to deposit 40% of the assessed amount of Rs. 6,27,44,486/-, in terms of the order dated 01st December, 2025, passed by the CGIT.

3. The order dated 01st December, 2025 passed by the CGIT reads as under: “xxx xxx xxx

7. Considering the fact that appeal is at initial stage of admission and overall circumstances where the beneficiaries is unidentifiable, total case of waiver is not made out. However, in view of the above facts, appellant is directed to deposit the 40% of the assessed amount by way of FDR favouring ‘Registrar CGIT’ initially for a period of one year having auto renewal mode, within six weeks from today. In the meanwhile, interim orders to continue till next date of hearing.”

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner further submits that 40% of the total assessed amount would be approximately Rs. 2,50,97,794/- and the petitioner be granted some time to deposit the amount.

5. Learned counsel for the respondent submits that he has no objection if certain time is granted to the petitioner to deposit the aforesaid amount. However, he submits that the said amount ought to be deposited with the respondent.

6. This Court notes that vide order dated 01st December, 2025, the Presiding Officer had directed that the aforesaid amount ought to be deposited with the Registrar CGIT.

7. Accordingly, considering the submissions made before this Court, the following directions are issued:

I. Petitioner is granted liberty to deposit 40% of the assessed amount, i.e., Rs. 2,50,97,794/-, in terms of the order dated 01st December, 2025, passed by the Presiding Officer, within a period of four weeks, from today.

II. Upon deposit of the aforesaid amount, the appeal of the petitioner before the CGIT-cum-Labour Court, Delhi-1, shall stand revived.

III. Liberty is granted to the respondent to move an application before the CGIT for release of the amount, as deposited by the petitioner.

IV. Upon such application being filed by the respondent, the same shall be considered by the Presiding Officer, in accordance with law.

8. With the aforesaid directions, the present writ petition, along with pending applications, is accordingly, disposed of.

MINI PUSHKARNA (JUDGE) JULY 6, 2026