Kerala High Court
Kerala Ayurveda Limited vs The Regional Provident Fund … on 21 July, 2026
CNR : KLHC010365112026
2026:KER:53742
WP(C) No.6852/2026 &
connected cases 1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.A.ABDUL HAKHIM
TUESDAY, THE 21ST DAY OF JULY 2026 / 30TH ASHADHA, 1948
WP(C) NO. 6852 OF 2026
PETITIONER:
M/S. KEL ELECTRICAL MACHINES LTD.,
REG. OFFICE NO.283/ 1 & 2, PUTHUR VILLAGE,
BEDRADKA P.O., KASARGODE, REPRESENTED BY ITS
MANAGING DIRECTOR MR. RAJEEVAN K., PIN - 671124
BY ADVS.
SHRI.ABEL TOM BENNY
SRI.D.PREM KAMATH
SHRI.AARON ZACHARIAS BENNY
SRI.V.G.SANKARAN
SHRI. MATHEW ANGELO DAVIS
SMT.JYOTHIKA KRISHNA
SMT.TESSA ROSE
RESPONDENTS:
1 THE REGIONAL PROVIDENT FUND COMMISSIONER,
EMPLOYEE PROVIDENT FUND ORGANIZATION REGIONAL
OFFICE, KANNUR, PIN - 670001
2 CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL,
HOUSING BOARD BUILDINGS, PANAMPILLY NAGAR, COCHIN,
REPRESENTED BY ITS PRESIDING OFFICER, PIN - 682036
BY ADV SRI.K.C.SANTHOSHKUMAR
SRI. BIJULAL K.R. (SR.GP)
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION
ON 13.07.2026, ALONG WITH WP(C).17214/2026 AND CONNECTED
CASES, THE COURT ON 21.07.2026 DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
CNR : KLHC010365112026
2026:KER:53742
WP(C) No.6852/2026 &
connected cases 2
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.A.ABDUL HAKHIM
TUESDAY, THE 21ST DAY OF JULY 2026 / 30TH ASHADHA, 1948
WP(C) NO. 14832 OF 2026
PETITIONER:
M/S. KERALA PAPER PRODUCTS LIMITED,
NEWSPRINT NAGAR P.O., KOTTAYAM, REPRESENTED BY ITS
MANAGING DIRECTOR, MR. PRASAD BALAKRISHNAN NAIR
PIN - 686616
BY ADVS.
SHRI.ABEL TOM BENNY
SRI.D.PREM KAMATH
SHRI.AARON ZACHARIAS BENNY
SRI.V.G.SANKARAN
SHRI. MATHEW ANGELO DAVIS
SMT.TESSA ROSE
SMT.JYOTHIKA KRISHNA
SHRI.AKHIL JAMES
RESPONDENTS:
1 THE REGIONAL PROVIDENT FUND COMMISSIONER,
EMPLOYEES PROVIDENT FUND ORGANISATION, REGIONAL
OFFICE, ADITHYA SABARI TOWER, POST OFFICE ROAD,
THIRUNAKKARA, KOTTAYAM, PIN - 686001
2 CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL,
HOUSING BOARD BUILDINGS, PANAMPILLY NAGAR, KOCHI,
REPRESENTED BY IT'S PRESIDING OFFICER, PIN -
682036
BY ADV SHRI.JOY THATTIL ITTOOP
SRI. BIJULAL K.R. (SR.GP)
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION
ON 13.07.2026, ALONG WITH WP(C).17214/2026 AND CONNECTED
CASES, THE COURT ON 21.07.2026 DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
CNR : KLHC010365112026
2026:KER:53742
WP(C) No.6852/2026 &
connected cases 3
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.A.ABDUL HAKHIM
TUESDAY, THE 21ST DAY OF JULY 2026 / 30TH ASHADHA, 1948
WP(C) NO. 15070 OF 2026
PETITIONER:
M/S. KERALA PAPER PRODUCTS LIMITED,
NEWSPRINT NAGAR P.O,KOTTAYAM, REPRESENTED BY ITS
MANAGING DIRECTOR, MR. PRASAD BALAKRISHNAN NAIR,
PIN - 686616
BY ADVS.
SHRI.ABEL TOM BENNY
SHRI.AARON ZACHARIAS BENNY
SRI.V.G.SANKARAN
SHRI. MATHEW ANGELO DAVIS
SMT.JYOTHIKA KRISHNA
SMT.TESSA ROSE
SHRI.AKHIL JAMES
RESPONDENTS:
1 THE REGIONAL PROVIDENT FUND COMMISSIONER,
EMPLOYEES PROVIDENT FUND ORGANISATION REGIONAL
OFFICE, ADITHYA SABARI TOWER, POST OFFICE ROAD,
THIRUNAKKARA, KOTTAYAM, PIN - 686001
2 CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL,
HOUSING BOARD BUILDINGS,PANAMPILLY NAGAR,
KOCHI,REPRESENTED BY IT'S PRESIDING OFFICER, PIN -
682036
BY ADV SHRI.JOY THATTIL ITTOOP
SRI. BIJULAL K.R. (SR.GP)
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION
ON 13.07.2026, ALONG WITH WP(C).17214/2026 AND CONNECTED
CASES, THE COURT ON 21.07.2026 DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
CNR : KLHC010365112026
2026:KER:53742
WP(C) No.6852/2026 &
connected cases 4
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.A.ABDUL HAKHIM
TUESDAY, THE 21ST DAY OF JULY 2026 / 30TH ASHADHA, 1948
WP(C) NO. 15071 OF 2026
PETITIONER:
M/S.KERALA PAPER PRODUCTS LIMITED,
NEWSPRINT NAGAR P.O,KOTTAYAM, REPRESENTED BY ITS
MANAGING DIRECTOR, MR. PRASAD BALAKRISHNAN NAIR,
PIN - 686616
BY ADVS.
SHRI.ABEL TOM BENNY
SRI.D.PREM KAMATH
SHRI.AARON ZACHARIAS BENNY
SRI.V.G.SANKARAN
SHRI. MATHEW ANGELO DAVIS
SMT.JYOTHIKA KRISHNA
SMT.TESSA ROSE
SHRI.AKHIL JAMES
RESPONDENTS:
1 THE REGIONAL PROVIDENT FUND COMMISSIONER,
EMPLOYEES PROVIDENT FUND ORGANISATION, REGIONAL
OFFICE, ADITHYA SABARI TOWER, POST OFFICE ROAD,
THIRUNAKKARA, KOTTAYAM, PIN - 686001
2 CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL,
HOUSING BOARD BUILDINGS,PANAMPILLY NAGAR,
KOCHI,REPRESENTED BY IT'S PRESIDING OFFICER, PIN -
682036
BY ADV SHRI.JOY THATTIL ITTOOP
SRI. BIJULAL K.R. (SR.GP)
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION
ON 13.07.2026, ALONG WITH WP(C).17214/2026 AND CONNECTED
CASES, THE COURT ON 21.07.2026 DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
CNR : KLHC010365112026
2026:KER:53742
WP(C) No.6852/2026 &
connected cases 5
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.A.ABDUL HAKHIM
TUESDAY, THE 21ST DAY OF JULY 2026 / 30TH ASHADHA, 1948
WP(C) NO. 15085 OF 2026
PETITIONER:
M/S. KERALA PAPER PRODUCTS LIMITED,
NEWSPRINT NAGAR P.O, KOTTAYAM, REPRESENTED BY ITS
MANAGING DIRECTOR, MR. PRASAD BALAKRISHNAN NAIR,
PIN - 686616
BY ADVS.
SHRI.ABEL TOM BENNY
SRI.D.PREM KAMATH
SHRI.AARON ZACHARIAS BENNY
SRI.V.G.SANKARAN
SHRI. MATHEW ANGELO DAVIS
SMT.JYOTHIKA KRISHNA
SMT.TESSA ROSE
SHRI.AKHIL JAMES
RESPONDENTS:
1 THE REGIONAL PROVIDENT FUND COMMISSIONER,
EMPLOYEES PROVIDENT FUND ORGANISATION REGIONAL
OFFICE, ADITHYA SABARI TOWER, POST OFFICE ROAD,
THIRUNAKKARA, KOTTAYAM, PIN - 686001
2 CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL,
HOUSING BOARD BUILDINGS,PANAMPILLY NAGAR,
KOCHI,REPRESENTED BY IT'S PRESIDING OFFICER, PIN -
682036
BY ADV SHRI.JOY THATTIL ITTOOP
SRI. BIJULAL K.R. (SR.GP)
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION
ON 13.07.2026, ALONG WITH WP(C).17214/2026 AND CONNECTED
CASES, THE COURT ON 21.07.2026 DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
CNR : KLHC010365112026
2026:KER:53742
WP(C) No.6852/2026 &
connected cases 6
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.A.ABDUL HAKHIM
TUESDAY, THE 21ST DAY OF JULY 2026 / 30TH ASHADHA, 1948
WP(C) NO. 15134 OF 2026
PETITIONER:
M/S. KERALA PAPER PRODUCTS LIMITED,
NEWSPRINT NAGAR P.O, KOTTAYAM, REPRESENTED BY ITS
MANAGING DIRECTOR, MR. PRASAD BALAKRISHNAN NAIR,
PIN - 686616
BY ADVS.
SHRI.ABEL TOM BENNY
SRI.D.PREM KAMATH
SHRI.AARON ZACHARIAS BENNY
SRI.V.G.SANKARAN
SHRI. MATHEW ANGELO DAVIS
SMT.JYOTHIKA KRISHNA
SMT.TESSA ROSE
SHRI.AKHIL JAMES
RESPONDENTS:
1 THE REGIONAL PROVIDENT FUND COMMISSIONER,
EMPLOYEES PROVIDENT FUND ORGANISATION, REGIONAL
OFFICE, ADITHYA SABARI TOWER, POST OFFICE ROAD,
THIRUNAKKARA, KOTTAYAM, PIN - 686001
2 CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL,
HOUSING BOARD BUILDINGS,PANAMPILLY NAGAR,
KOCHI,REPRESENTED BY IT'S PRESIDING OFFICER, PIN -
682036
BY ADV SHRI.JOY THATTIL ITTOOP
SRI. BIJULAL K.R. (SR.GP)
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION
ON 13.07.2026, ALONG WITH WP(C).17214/2026 AND CONNECTED
CASES, THE COURT ON 21.07.2026 DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
CNR : KLHC010365112026
2026:KER:53742
WP(C) No.6852/2026 &
connected cases 7
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.A.ABDUL HAKHIM
TUESDAY, THE 21ST DAY OF JULY 2026 / 30TH ASHADHA, 1948
WP(C) NO. 15150 OF 2026
PETITIONER:
M/S. KERALA PAPER PRODUCTS LIMITED,
NEWSPRINT NAGAR P.O., KOTTAYAM, REPRESENTED BY ITS
MANAGING DIRECTOR, MR. PRASAD BALAKRISHNAN NAIR,
PIN - 686616
BY ADVS.
SHRI.ABEL TOM BENNY
SRI.D.PREM KAMATH
SHRI.AARON ZACHARIAS BENNY
SRI.V.G.SANKARAN
SHRI. MATHEW ANGELO DAVIS
SMT.JYOTHIKA KRISHNA
SMT.TESSA ROSE
RESPONDENTS:
1 THE REGIONAL PROVIDENT FUND COMMISSIONER,
EMPLOYEES PROVIDENT FUND ORGANISATION, REGIONAL
OFFICE, ADITHYA SABARI TOWER, POST OFFICE ROAD,
THIRUNAKKARA, KOTTAYAM, PIN - 680001
2 CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL,
HOUSING BOARD BUILDINGS,PANAMPILLY NAGAR,
KOCHI,REPRESENTED BY IT'S PRESIDING OFFICER, PIN -
682036
BY ADV SHRI.JOY THATTIL ITTOOP
SRI. BIJULAL K.R. (SR.GP)
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION
ON 13.07.2026, ALONG WITH WP(C).17214/2026 AND CONNECTED
CASES, THE COURT ON 21.07.2026 DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
CNR : KLHC010365112026
2026:KER:53742
WP(C) No.6852/2026 &
connected cases 8
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.A.ABDUL HAKHIM
TUESDAY, THE 21ST DAY OF JULY 2026 / 30TH ASHADHA, 1948
WP(C) NO. 15210 OF 2026
PETITIONER:
M/S KERALA PAPER PRODUCTS LIMITED,
NEWSPRINT NAGAR P.O, KOTTAYAM, REPRESENTED BY ITS
MANAGING DIRECTOR, MR. PRASAD BALAKRISHNAN NAIR,
PIN - 686616
BY ADVS.
SHRI.ABEL TOM BENNY
SRI.D.PREM KAMATH
SHRI.AARON ZACHARIAS BENNY
SRI.V.G.SANKARAN
SHRI. MATHEW ANGELO DAVIS
SMT.TESSA ROSE
SHRI.AKHIL JAMES
RESPONDENTS:
1 THE REGIONAL PROVIDENT FUND COMMISSIONER,
EMPLOYEES PROVIDENT FUND ORGANISATION REGIONAL
OFFICE, ADITHYA SABARI TOWER, POST OFFICE ROAD,
THIRUNAKKARA, KOTTAYAM, PIN - 686001
2 CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL,
HOUSING BOARD BUILDINGS,PANAMPILLY NAGAR,
KOCHI,REPRESENTED BY IT'S PRESIDING OFFICER, PIN -
682036
BY ADV SHRI.JOY THATTIL ITTOOP
SRI. BIJULAL K.R. (SR.GP)
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION
ON 13.07.2026, ALONG WITH WP(C).17214/2026 AND CONNECTED
CASES, THE COURT ON 21.07.2026 DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
CNR : KLHC010365112026
2026:KER:53742
WP(C) No.6852/2026 &
connected cases 9
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.A.ABDUL HAKHIM
TUESDAY, THE 21ST DAY OF JULY 2026 / 30TH ASHADHA, 1948
WP(C) NO. 17214 OF 2026
PETITIONER:
KERALA AYURVEDA LIMITED,
KERALA AYURVEDA PHARMACY LTD., ATHANI, ALUVA,
ERNAKULAM, REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGER HR SMT.
SMITHA KRISHNAN, PIN - 683585
BY ADVS.
SHRI.ABEL TOM BENNY
SRI.D.PREM KAMATH
SHRI.AARON ZACHARIAS BENNY
SRI.V.G.SANKARAN
SHRI.K.S.MUHAMMED SHEFIN
SHRI. MATHEW ANGELO DAVIS
SMT.TESSA ROSE
SMT.JYOTHIKA KRISHNA
SHRI.AKHIL JAMES
RESPONDENTS:
1 THE REGIONAL PROVIDENT FUND COMMISSIONER,
EMPLOYEES PROVIDENT FUND ORGANISATION, KALOOR,
KOCHI, PIN - 682017
2 CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL,
HOUSING BOARF BUILDINGS, PANAMPILLYNAGAR, KOCHI,
REPRESENTED BY IT'S PRESIDING OFFICER, PIN -
682036
BY ADV SMT.LAKSHMI.N.KAIMAL
SRI. BIJULAL K.R. (SR.GP)
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION
ON 13.07.2026, ALONG WITH WP(C).6852/2026, 14832/2026 AND
CONNECTED CASES, THE COURT ON 21.07.2026 DELIVERED THE
FOLLOWING:
CNR : KLHC010365112026
2026:KER:53742
WP(C) No.6852/2026 &
connected cases 10
JUDGMENT
C.R.
[WP(C) Nos. 6852/2026, 14832/2026, 15070/2026, 15071/2026, 15085/2026,
15134/2026, 15150/2026, 15210/2026, 17214/2026]
1. The Petitioners are the Appellants in the Appeals filed
under Section 7-I of the Employees’ Provident Funds and
Miscellaneous Provisions Act, 1952 (for short, ‘the Act’),
challenging the Orders imposing the penalty of damages
under Section 14-B of the Act. The Petitioners are
challenging the condition imposed by the Central
Government Industrial Tribunal-cum-Labour Court,
Ernakulam, to pay a percentage of the determined
amount of damages under Section 14-B of the Act. In the
impugned Orders challenged in all these Writ Petitions,
except in W.P.(C) No.17214/2026, the Tribunal ordered
CNR : KLHC010365112026
2026:KER:53742
WP(C) No.6852/2026 &
connected cases 11
payment as a condition for admission of the Appeal and
in the impugned Order challenged in W.P.(C)
No.17214/2026, the Tribunal ordered payment as a
condition for granting stay of the Order impugned in the
Appeal. In all Writ Petitions except W.P.(C)
Nos.6852/2026 and 17214/2026, the conditional payment
is 10% of the determined damages. In W.P.(C)
Nos.6852/2026 and 17214/2026, the conditional payment
is 20% of the determined damages. The Code on Social
Security, 2020 (for short, ‘the Code’) was implemented
with effect from 25.11.2025. In all these cases, Appeals
are filed before the implementation of the Code in the
years 2023 and 2024. The impugned Orders in all Writ
Petitions, except in W.P.(C) No.6852/2026, were passed
after the implementation of the Code. The impugned
CNR : KLHC010365112026
2026:KER:53742
WP(C) No.6852/2026 &
connected cases 12
Order in W.P.(C) No.6852/2026 was passed before the
implementation of the Code.
2. I heard the learned Senior Counsel for the Petitioners, Sri.
Benny Thomas, instructed by Adv. Sri. Abel Tom Benny
and the learned Counsel for the EPF Organisation, Sri.
K.C. Santhosh Kumar, Sri. Joy Thattil Ittoop and Sri.
Lakshmy Kaimal.
3. Learned Senior Counsel for the Petitioners contended
that since the impugned Orders were passed subsequent
to the implementation of the Code, it is the provisions of
the Code which is applicable and hence the Tribunal has
no power to impose a condition to pay any part of the
damages in the Appeals filed by the Petitioners. In
Section 23(1) of Chapter III of the Code providing Appeal
to the Tribunal, the pre-deposit is made conditional only
to the Appeal under Clause (a) therein which is against
CNR : KLHC010365112026
2026:KER:53742
WP(C) No.6852/2026 &
connected cases 13
the determination and assessment of dues under Section
125 relating to Chapter III. Section 125 is the
corresponding provision for Section 7-A of the Act. Appeal
against the levy of damages is covered under Clause (b)
of Section 23(1) of the Code. Sub-section (3) of Section
23 of the Code providing pre-deposit is applicable only to
the Appeals filed under Clause (a) of Section 23(1) and
not to Clause (b). Levy of damages is provided under
Section 128 of Chapter XI of the Code which is the
corresponding provision to Section 14-B of the Act. There
is a rationale behind imposing pre-deposit only to the
Appeals filed under Section 7-A of the Act which provides
for the determination of contribution. The amount
determined under Section 7-A has to go directly to the
EPF and it is mandatorily be paid by the employer,
whereas the amount imposed as damages under Section
CNR : KLHC010365112026
2026:KER:53742
WP(C) No.6852/2026 &
connected cases 14
14-B of the Act does not go to the EPF and hence the
Legislature thought it fit to avoid pre-deposit in the Appeal
filed against the Order under Section 14-B of the Act.
There is discretion to the Officer while passing the Order
under Section 14-B of the Act. The Officer has the power
to impose damages not exceeding the amount of arrears,
which implies that the Officer can impose penalty of
damages below the amount of arrears taking into account
the facts and circumstances of the case. Learned Senior
Counsel invited my attention to Clause 32A of the
Employees’ Provident Funds (EPF) Scheme, 1952, which
provides for different rates of damages with reference to
the period of default. It is further contended that even
going by the provisions in the Act, the Tribunal has no
power to order a conditional pre-deposit. The Tribunal has
no jurisdiction to impose pre-deposit of a percentage of
CNR : KLHC010365112026
2026:KER:53742
WP(C) No.6852/2026 &
connected cases 15
the determined damages for entertaining an Appeal filed
under Section 7-I of the Act against the Order passed
under Section 14-B ordering recovery of damages.
Section 7-O of the Act mandating pre-deposit is
applicable only to the Appeals filed under Section 7-I
challenging the Order passed under Section 7-A of the
Act. It is clear from the language of Section 7-O that the
same is applicable to the Appeals filed against the Order
under Section 7-A. The Tribunal misconstrued and
misunderstood Section 7-O and applied the same to the
Appeals filed by the Petitioners directing pre-deposit of a
percentage of the determined damages. Legislature
never intended to include the Appeals filed against the
Orders passed under Section 14-B of the Act within the
scope of Section 7-O of the Act. The confusion, if any, on
the interpretation of Section 7-O no longer exists since the
CNR : KLHC010365112026
2026:KER:53742
WP(C) No.6852/2026 &
connected cases 16
very same provision is continued in more clear language
when the Code was enacted by the Parliament. Learned
Senior Counsel cited the decisions of the Delhi High Court
in Old Village Industries Ltd. v. Assistant Provident
Fund Commissioner, Employees’ Provident Fund
Organization and Another [2005 (3) L.L.N. 572],
Pashok Tea Estate v. Regional Provident Fund
Commissioner [2014 SCC OnLine Del 4840] and Jai
Balaji Security Services (Regd.) v. A.P.F.C. Delhi
(North) [2015 SCC OnLine Del 14099] and the decision
of the Allahabad High Court in Planner India Pvt. Ltd. v.
Employees Provident Fund Appellate Tribunal and
Others [2022 LLR 342] to substantiate the point that
Section 7-O of the Act would apply only to the Appeals
filed against the Orders passed under Section 7-A of the
Act. Learned Senior Counsel concluded his arguments
CNR : KLHC010365112026
2026:KER:53742
WP(C) No.6852/2026 &
connected cases 17
praying to set aside the impugned Orders to the extent to
which it imposed condition to pay 10% / 20% of the
penalty of determined damages by the EPF Authority.
4. On the other hand, the learned Counsel for the EPF
Organisation contended that the language of Section 7-O
is clear and does not admit two interpretations. Section 7-
A is referred in Section 7-O only for the purpose of
referring to the Officer who passed the Order impugned
in the Appeal. As per Section 7-O, pre-deposit is
mandatory to entertain an Appeal which is filed against
any Order passed by the Officer referred to in Section 7-
A. There could not be any quarrel that the Order under
Section 14-B imposing penalty of damages is also passed
by the very same Officer who passes the Order under
Section 7-A determining the contribution. Hence, Section
7-O is applicable to the Appeals filed under Section 7-I
CNR : KLHC010365112026
2026:KER:53742
WP(C) No.6852/2026 &
connected cases 18
challenging the Orders passed under Section 7-A and
Section 14-B alike. The Appeals are filed by the
Petitioners before the implementation of the Code, and
hence, it is the provisions under the Act which is
applicable to the Appeals filed by the Petitioners. In all the
Appeals, the Petitioners have filed a Composite
Application for stay of the impugned Orders and waiver of
pre-deposit, fully understanding that Section 7-O is
applicable to the Appeals filed by the Petitioners
challenging the Orders under Section 14-B. It is clear from
the impugned Orders that the Tribunal directed payment
of a percentage of the determined damages not as a
condition for entertaining the Appeal but as a condition for
granting the Interim Order of stay sought for by the
Petitioners. In such case, the Tribunal has directed
payment of the percentage of the determined damages
CNR : KLHC010365112026
2026:KER:53742
WP(C) No.6852/2026 &
connected cases 19
exercising its discretion while granting the Interim Order.
It is well settled by the decision of the Apex Court and the
High Court that every Court and Tribunal is having
discretion to impose any condition which it deems fit while
granting Interim Order and the said discretion is not liable
to judicial review. Learned Counsel for the EPF
Organisation contended that the Petitioners have filed a
Composite Application in the Appeals filed by them for
seeking waiver of deposit and stay. In such case, the
Petitioners sought waiver of pre-deposit correctly
understanding Section 7-O which mandates pre-deposit
for entertaining the Appeal. In such case, they cannot
contend that Section 7-O does not contemplate pre-
deposit for Appeal challenging the Orders passed under
Section 14-B. The learned Counsel for the EPF
Organisation cited the decision of the Madhya Pradesh
CNR : KLHC010365112026
2026:KER:53742
WP(C) No.6852/2026 &
connected cases 20
High Court in The Center for Entrepreneurship
Development (M/S) v. Regional Provident
Commissioner [I.L.R. 2024 M.P. 2286], the decision of
the Madras High Court in M/s. Sri Ramalinga Mills Ltd.
B Unit v. Regional Provident Fund Commissioner – II
[WP(MD) No.4870/2022], the decisions of the Hon’ble
Supreme Court in Grindlays Bank Ltd. v. Central
Government Industrial Tribunal and Others [1980
(Supp) SCC 420], Organo Chemical Industries and
Another v. Union of India and Others [(1979) 4 SCC
573] and Assistant Collector of Central Excise v.
Dunlop India Ltd. and Others [(1985) 1 SCC 260] and
the decision of this Court in Koshy Philip v. Thomas P.
Mathew and Others [2025 SCC OnLine Ker 13830] in
support of their contentions.
5. I have considered the rival contentions.
CNR : KLHC010365112026
2026:KER:53742
WP(C) No.6852/2026 &
connected cases 21
6. The first question to be answered is whether it is the
provisions of the Act or the provisions of the Code which
are applicable to the Appeals filed by the Petitioners.
Chapter III of the Code replaced the Act. Section 23(1)
and 23(2) of the Code replaced Section 7-I of the Act.
Section 23(3) of the Code replaced Section 7-O of the Act.
Section 125 of the Code replaced Section 7-A of the Act.
Section 128 of the Code replaced Section 14-B of the Act.
There could not be any dispute that, as per Section 23(3)
of the Code, the pre-deposit for entertaining the Appeal is
mandatory only for the Appeal filed against the
determination and assessment of dues under Section 125
of Chapter XI of the Code. The Appeals, which are the
subject matter in all these Writ Petitions, were filed before
the implementation of the Code on 25.11.2025. In such
case, even though the impugned Orders are passed by
CNR : KLHC010365112026
2026:KER:53742
WP(C) No.6852/2026 &
connected cases 22
the Tribunal after the implementation of the Code, the
provisions which are applicable to the Appeals filed by the
Petitioners are the provisions under the Act. The words
used in the relevant provisions both under the Act and the
Code are that ‘No Appeal filed by the employer shall be
entertained …. unless he has deposited ……’. Thus, the
pre-deposit mandated should be paid before the
entertainment of the Appeal. In these cases, all the
Appeals are filed in the years 2023 and 2024. It is the law
as on that date that is applicable to the Appeal and not
the law as on the date of passing the impugned Orders.
Hence, I hold that it is the provisions of the Act which are
applicable to the Appeals filed by the Petitioners.
7. The second question to be answered is whether the pre-
deposit mandated under Section 7-O of the Act is
applicable to the Appeals filed against the Orders under
CNR : KLHC010365112026
2026:KER:53742
WP(C) No.6852/2026 &
connected cases 23
Section 14-B of the Act. Section 7-O of the Act provides
that no Appeal by the employer shall be entertained by a
Tribunal unless he has deposited 75% of the amount due
from him as determined by an officer referred to in Section
7-A of the Act. As per Proviso to Section 7-O, the Tribunal
has the power to waive or reduce the amount to be
deposited under Section 7-O for reasons to be recorded
in writing. Section 7-I of the Act provides for Appeals
against the Orders including Orders under Section 7-A
and Section 14-B. It is true that the Orders under Sections
7-A and 14-B of the Act are passed by one and the same
Officer. Section 7-O refers to ‘the amount due’ from the
employer as determined by an Officer referred to in
Section 7-A. Under Section 7-A also, the Officer has to
determine ‘the amount due’ from the employer. Under
Section 14-B, the Officer is determining the penalty of
CNR : KLHC010365112026
2026:KER:53742
WP(C) No.6852/2026 &
connected cases 24
damages and not the amount due. Since Section 7-O of
the Act refers only to the amount due from the employer
and does not refer to the penalty of damages and does
not refer to the Officer referred to in Section 14-B, there is
no ambiguity. Section 7-O is applicable only to the
Appeals challenging the determination of the amount due
from the employer under Section 7-A. I am unable to
accept the contention of the learned Counsel for the EPF
Organisation that the Officer under Section 7-A referred
to in Section 7-O is referred only for the purpose of
referring to the person who passed the Order of
determination and not for referring to the Orders passed
by such Officer.
8. The Delhi High Court in Old Village Industries Ltd.
(supra) held that the Legislature in its own wisdom has
restricted the application of the provisions of Section 7-I
CNR : KLHC010365112026
2026:KER:53742
WP(C) No.6852/2026 &
connected cases 25
to the Order passed under Section 7A and that once the
provisions of Section 7-O does not include an Appeal
against an Order under Section 14-B, then it would be in
no way permissible to include such an Order by
implication or otherwise. The decision in Old Village
Industries Ltd. (supra) is followed by the Delhi High
Court in Pashok Tea Estate (supra). In Jai Balaji
Security Services (Regd.) (supra), the Division Bench
of the Delhi High Court reiterated that Section 7-O of the
Act would apply only to the Appeals filed against the
Orders passed under Section 7-A of the Act. The
Allahabad High Court in Planner India Pvt. Ltd. (supra)
held that the provision of Section 7-O of the Act does not
obligate an appellant to deposit any part of the damages
as a pre-condition to maintain Appeal against the Order
determining damages under Section 14-B. In the decision
CNR : KLHC010365112026
2026:KER:53742
WP(C) No.6852/2026 &
connected cases 26
of the Madras High Court in M/s. Sri Ramalinga Mills
Ltd. B Unit (supra) also, it is held that there is no
requirement of pre-deposit for filing an Appeal against the
Order imposing damages under Section 14-B of the Act,
though the Order imposing the condition for stay is
upheld. In The Center for Entrepreneurship
Development (M/S) (supra), while considering the power
of the Tribunal for stay in an Appeal against the Order
under Section 14-B of the Act, Madhya Pradesh High
Court held that although there is no provision for staying
the Order of recovery during the pendency of the Appeal,
the Tribunal is having discretionary power to stay the
recovery and that Tribunal is also having discretion to stay
the recovery on any condition or stay the Order in
absolute or in part and it is permissible. I am in respectful
agreement with the views expressed in these decisions.
CNR : KLHC010365112026
2026:KER:53742
WP(C) No.6852/2026 &
connected cases 27
Hence, I hold that Section 7-O of the Act mandating pre-
deposit is not applicable to the Appeals challenging the
Orders under Section 14-B of the Act.
9. The third question is regarding the nature of deposit
ordered by the Tribunal. In the impugned Orders
challenged in all these Writ Petitions, except in W.P.(C)
No.17214/2026, the Tribunal ordered payment of a
percentage of the damages as a condition for admission
of the Appeal and in the impugned Order challenged in
W.P.(C) No.17214/2026, the Tribunal ordered payment of
a percentage of the damages as a condition for granting
stay of the Order impugned in the Appeal. When the law
is clear that there could not be any condition for pre-
deposit for entertaining Appeals filed against the Orders
passed under Section 14-B, on account of the mere fact
that the Appellants sought waiver, the Appellants could
CNR : KLHC010365112026
2026:KER:53742
WP(C) No.6852/2026 &
connected cases 28
not be compelled to make the pre-deposit. Since Section
7-O of the Act mandating pre-deposit is not applicable to
the Appeals challenging the Orders under Section 14-B of
the Act, the impugned Orders challenged in all these Writ
Petitions, except in W.P.(C) No.17214/2026, are liable to
be interfered with, to the extent of imposing condition for
pre-deposit for admission of the Appeals.
10. In W.P.(C) No.17214/2026, the Tribunal has ordered
payment of a percentage of the determined damages
under Section 14-B as a condition for granting stay of the
impugned demand. The learned Counsel for the EPF
Organisation submitted that it is the discretion of the
Appellate Court/Tribunal to impose any condition when it
grants Interim Order in the Appeal. In Grindlays Bank
Ltd. (supra), the Hon’ble Supreme Court held that a
Tribunal or body should be considered to be endowed
CNR : KLHC010365112026
2026:KER:53742
WP(C) No.6852/2026 &
connected cases 29
with ancillary or incidental powers as are necessary to
discharge its functions effectively for the purpose of doing
justice between the parties. In Organo Chemical
Industries (supra), the Hon’ble Supreme Court held that
the expression ‘damages’ occurring in Section 14-B is, in
substance, a penalty imposed on the employer for the
breach of the statutory obligation; that the object of
imposition of damages under Section 14-B serves the
purpose of penalising the defaulting employer as also to
provide reparation for the amount of loss suffered by the
employees. In Dunlop India Ltd. (supra), the Hon’ble
Supreme Court held that where matters of public revenue
are concerned, it is of utmost importance to realise that
Interim Orders ought not to be granted merely because a
prima facie case has been shown; that the balance of
convenience must be clearly in favour of the making of an
CNR : KLHC010365112026
2026:KER:53742
WP(C) No.6852/2026 &
connected cases 30
Interim Order, and that there should not be the slightest
indication of a likelihood of prejudice to the public interest.
The learned Counsel for the EPF Organisation contended
that the Tribunal exercised its discretion to impose
payment of a percentage of the determined amount under
Section 14-B as a condition for stay; that the Tribunal has
got absolute discretion in the matter taking into account
the facts and circumstances of the case; that the
imposition of the condition of payment of 10% / 20% is
very reasonable and the Petitioners could not be said to
be prejudiced on account of the said condition; that even
though the Tribunal has ordered payment of a percentage
of the determined damages as a condition for admission
of the Appeal in the impugned Orders challenged in all the
cases except in W.P.(C) No.17214/2026, it is pertinent to
CNR : KLHC010365112026
2026:KER:53742
WP(C) No.6852/2026 &
connected cases 31
note that the Tribunal has not imposed any further
payment for granting the Interim Order.
11. The Courts/Tribunals have absolute discretion to impose
conditions in the interest of justice while passing Interim
Orders, in the absence of any provision restricting the
same. It is true that in all cases except W.P.(C)
No.17214/2026, the Tribunal has not imposed any
condition for granting Interim Order. Learned Senior
Counsel for the Petitioners contended that if this Court
holds that the Tribunal has discretion to impose condition
for stay, it will have the effect of permitting the Tribunal to
impose condition for entertaining the Appeal indirectly,
which is not permissible under Section 7-O of the Act. I
am unable to accept this contention. It is well settled that
it is the discretion of the Court/Tribunal to impose any
condition which is required in the facts and circumstances
CNR : KLHC010365112026
2026:KER:53742
WP(C) No.6852/2026 &
connected cases 32
of the case while passing the Interim Order to secure
justice. Merely because there is no condition for pre-
deposit for entertaining the Appeal, it could not be said
that the Courts and Tribunals do not have any power to
impose condition while granting stay. As rightly contended
by the learned Counsel for the EPF Organisation, the
Tribunal might have avoided the condition for stay since
there is already a condition for admission of the Appeals.
Hence, even if the impugned Orders are liable to be set
aside, the Tribunal is liable to be directed to consider the
Applications seeking interim stay of the impugned
demand, afresh.
12. In view of the aforesaid discussions and findings, these
Writ Petitions are disposed of, issuing a writ of certiorari
setting aside the impugned Orders and further directing
the Industrial Tribunal to reconsider the Interim
CNR : KLHC010365112026
2026:KER:53742
WP(C) No.6852/2026 &
connected cases 33
Application for stay in all the Appeals filed by the
Petitioners afresh within a period of two months. Coercive
proceedings on the basis of the Orders which are
challenged in the Appeals are kept in abeyance till the
disposal of the said Interim Applications by the Tribunal.
Sd/-
M.A.ABDUL HAKHIM
JUDGE
Jma/shg
CNR : KLHC010365112026
2026:KER:53742
WP(C) No.6852/2026 &
connected cases 34
APPENDIX OF WP(C) NO. 6852 OF 2026
PETITIONER EXHIBITS
Exhibit P1 TRUE COPY OF THE PROFIT AND LOSS ACCOUNT
OF THE COMPANY DURING THE PERIOD UP TO
MARCH 2017
Exhibit P2 TRUE COPY OF THE PROFIT AND LOSS ACCOUNT
OF THE COMPANY DURING THE PERIOD UPTO
MARCH 2018
Exhibit P3 TRUE COPY OF THE PROFIT AND LOSS ACCOUNT
OF THE COMPANY DURING THE PERIOD UPTO
MARCH 2019
Exhibit P4 TRUE COPY OF THE PROFIT AND LOSS ACCOUNT
OF THE COMPANY DURING THE PERIOD UPTO
MARCH 2020
Exhibit P5 TRUE COPY OF THE PROFIT AND LOSS ACCOUNT
OF THE COMPANY DURING THE PERIOD UPTO
MARCH 2021
Exhibit P6 TRUE COPY OF THE PROFIT AND LOSS ACCOUNT
OF THE COMPANY DURING THE PERIOD UPTO
MARCH 2021
Exhibit P7 A TRUE COPY OF THE MEMORANDUM OF APPEAL
NO. 73/2023, DATED WITHOUT ANNEXURES FILED
BY THE PETITIONER DATED 02.08.2023
Exhibit P8 A TRUE COPY OF THE INTERIM ORDER PASSED BY
2ND RESPONDENT DATED 10.11.2025 IN APPEAL
NO. 73/2023
CNR : KLHC010365112026
2026:KER:53742
WP(C) No.6852/2026 &
connected cases 35
APPENDIX OF WP(C) NO. 14832 OF 2026
PETITIONER EXHIBITS
Exhibit P1 A TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 29.01.2021
PASSED BY THE NCLT
Exhibit P2 A TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 21/06/2023
PASSED BY NCLAT
Exhibit P3 A COPY OF THE PROCEEDINGS OF CIVIL APPEAL
7724/2023 DATED 10/05/2024 OF HON’BLE
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
Exhibit P4 A TRUE COPY OF THE GOVERNMENT ORDER DATED
08.12.2021, G .0. (RT)NO. 1339/2021 /ID
DATED,THIRUVANANTHAPURARN
Exhibit P5 A TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER NO
KR/KTM/10290/00A/RPFC/PENAL
DAMAGE/14B/2348
Exhibit P6 THE TRUE COPY OF THE INTERIM ORDER PASSED
BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT DATED 12.03.2026 IN
APPEAL NO 24/2026
Exhibit P7 TRUE COPY OF THE INTERIM ORDER DATED
23.02.3036 IN WP(C) NO. 6852 OF 2026 OF
THIS HON’BLE COURT.
CNR : KLHC010365112026
2026:KER:53742
WP(C) No.6852/2026 &
connected cases 36
APPENDIX OF WP(C) NO. 15070 OF 2026
PETITIONER EXHIBITS
Exhibit P1 A TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 29.01.2021
PASSED BY THE NCLT
Exhibit P2 A TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 21/06/2023
PASSED BY NCLAT
Exhibit P3 A COPY OF THE PROCEEDINGS OF CIVIL APPEAL
7724/2023 DATED 10/05/2024
Exhibit P4 A TRUE COPY OF THE GOVERNMENT ORDER DATED
08.12.2021 G .0. (RT)NO. 1339/2021 /ID
THIRUVANANTHAPURARNM,
Exhibit P5 A TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER NO KR/ KTM/
10290/00B/ RPFC/ PENAL DAMAGE/14B/ 2349
DATED 22.12.2023
Exhibit P6 THE TRUE COPY OF THE INTERIM ORDER PASSED
BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT DATED 12.03.2026 IN
APPEAL NO 25/2026
Exhibit P7 TRUE COPY OF THE INTERIM ORDER DATED
23.02.2026 IN WP(C) 6852/2026 OF THIS
HON’BLE COURT
CNR : KLHC010365112026
2026:KER:53742
WP(C) No.6852/2026 &
connected cases 37
APPENDIX OF WP(C) NO. 15071 OF 2026
PETITIONER EXHIBITS
Exhibit P1 A TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 29.01.2021
PASSED BY THE NCLT
Exhibit P2 A TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 21/06/2023
PASSED BY NCLAT
Exhibit P3 A COPY OF THE PROCEEDINGS OF CIVIL APPEAL
7724/2023 DATED 10/05/2024 OF SUPREME
COURT OF INDIA
Exhibit P4 A TRUE COPY OF THE GOVERNMENT ORDER DATED
08.12.2021 G .0. (RT) NO. 1339/2021 /ID,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM
Exhibit P5 A TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER NO
KR/KTM/10290/00E/RPFC/PENAL
DAMAGE/14B/2022-23/ 2352 DATED 27.12.2023
Exhibit P6 THE TRUE COPY OF THE INTERIM ORDER PASSED
BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT DATED 12.03.2026 IN
APPEAL NO 28/2024
Exhibit P7 A TRUE COPY OF THE INTERIM ORDER DATED
23.02.2026 IN WP(C) 6852/2026 OF THIS
HON’BLE COURT
CNR : KLHC010365112026
2026:KER:53742
WP(C) No.6852/2026 &
connected cases 38
APPENDIX OF WP(C) NO. 15085 OF 2026
PETITIONER EXHIBITS
Exhibit P1 M/S HINDUSTAN NEWSPRINT LTD. A TRUE COPY
OF THE ORDER DATED 29.01.2021 PASSED BY
THE NCLT
Exhibit P2 A TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 21/06/2023
PASSED BY NCLAT
Exhibit P3 A COPY OF THE PROCEEDINGS OF CIVIL APPEAL
7724/2023 DATED 10/05/2024 OF SUPREME
COURT OF INDIA
Exhibit P4 A TRUE COPY OF THE GOVERNMENT ORDER DATED
08.12.2021 G .0. (RT) NO. 1339/2021 /ID,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM
Exhibit P5 A TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER NO
KR/KTM/10290/00D/RPFC/PENAL
DAMAGE/14B/2022-23/ 2351 DATED 26.12.2023
Exhibit P6 THE TRUE COPY OF THE INTERIM ORDER PASSED
BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT DATED 12.03.2026 IN
APPEAL NO 27/2024
Exhibit P7 A TRUE COPY OF THE INTERIM ORDER DATED
23.02.2026 IN WP(C) 6852/2026 OF THIS
HON’BLE COURT
CNR : KLHC010365112026
2026:KER:53742
WP(C) No.6852/2026 &
connected cases 39
APPENDIX OF WP(C) NO. 15134 OF 2026
PETITIONER EXHIBITS
Exhibit P1 A TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 29.01.2021
PASSED BY THE NCLT
Exhibit P2 A TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 21/06/2023
PASSED BY NCLAT
Exhibit P3 A COPY OF THE PROCEEDINGS OF CIVIL APPEAL
7724/2023 DATED 10/05/2024 OF SUPREME
COURT OF INDIA
Exhibit P4 A TRUE COPY OF THE GOVERNMENT ORDER DATED
08.12.2021 G .0. (RT) NO. 1339/2021 /ID,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM
Exhibit P5 A TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER NO
KR/KTM/10290/00F/RPFC/PENAL
DAMAGE/14B/2022-23/ 2353 DATED 27.12.2023
Exhibit P6 THE TRUE COPY OF THE INTERIM ORDER PASSED
BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT DATED 12.03.2026 IN
APPEAL NO 29/2024
Exhibit P7 A TRUE COPY OF THE INTERIM ORDER DATED
23.02.2026 IN WP(C) 6852/2026 OF THIS
HON’BLE COURT
CNR : KLHC010365112026
2026:KER:53742
WP(C) No.6852/2026 &
connected cases 40
APPENDIX OF WP(C) NO. 15150 OF 2026
PETITIONER EXHIBITS
Exhibit P1 . A TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 29.01.2021
PASSED BY THE NCLT
Exhibit P2 A TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 21/06/2023
PASSED BY NCLAT
Exhibit P3 A COPY OF THE PROCEEDINGS OF CIVIL APPEAL
7724/2023 DATED 10/05/2024 OF SUPREME
COURT OF INDIA
Exhibit P4 A TRUE COPY OF THE GOVERNMENT ORDER DATED
08.12.2021 G .0. (RT) NO. 1339/2021 /ID,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM
Exhibit P5 A TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER NO
KR/KTM/10290/RPFC/PENAL DAMAGE/14B/2022-
23/ 2355 A DATED 12.12.2023
Exhibit P6 THE TRUE COPY OF THE INTERIM ORDER PASSED
BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT DATED 12.03.2026 IN
APPEAL NO 30/2024
Exhibit P7 A TRUE COPY OF THE INTERIM ORDER DATED
23.02.2026 IN WP(C) 6852/2026 OF THIS
HON’BLE COURT
CNR : KLHC010365112026
2026:KER:53742
WP(C) No.6852/2026 &
connected cases 41
APPENDIX OF WP(C) NO. 15210 OF 2026
PETITIONER EXHIBITS
Exhibit P1 A TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 29.01.2021
PASSED BY THE NCLT
Exhibit P2 A TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 21/06/2023
PASSED BY NCLAT
Exhibit P3 A COPY OF THE PROCEEDINGS OF CIVIL APPEAL
7724/2023 DATED 10/05/2024 OF SUPREME
COURT OF INDIA
Exhibit P4 A TRUE COPY OF THE GOVERNMENT ORDER G .0.
(RT)NO. 1339/2021 /ID DATED 08/12/2021,
THIRUVANANTHAPURARM,
Exhibit P5 A TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER NO KR/ KTM/
10290/00C/ RPFC/ PENAL DAMAGE/14B/ 2350
DATED 26.12.2023
Exhibit P6 THE TRUE COPY OF THE INTERIM ORDER PASSED
BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT DATED 12.03.2026 IN
APPEAL NO 26/2024
Exhibit P7 A TRUE COPY OF THE INTERIM ORDER DATED
23.02.2026 IN WP(C) 6852/2026 OF THIS
HON’BLE COURT
CNR : KLHC010365112026
2026:KER:53742
WP(C) No.6852/2026 &
connected cases 42
APPENDIX OF WP(C) NO. 17214 OF 2026
PETITIONER EXHIBITS
Exhibit P1 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 24.08.2023
ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT
Exhibit P2 THE TRUE COPY OF THE INTERIM ORDER PASSED
BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT DATED 22.04.2026 IN
APPEAL NO 111/2023
Exhibit P3 A TRUE COPY OF THE INTERIM ORDER DATED
23.02.2026 IN WP(C) 6852/2026 OF THIS
HON’BLE COURT.
Exhibit P4 TRUE COPY OF THE INTERIM ORDER DATED
17.04.2026 IN WP(C) 15085/2026 OF THIS
HON’BLE COURT.
