Employees Provident Fund Organization Thru. Central Provident Fund Commissioner And 2 v. Puneet Singh & Anr.

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, Sri Sudhanshu Srivastava, learned counsel holding brief of Sri Praveen Kumar, learned counsel for opposite party no.1 and Sri Suryansh Narula, learned counsel holding brief of Ms. Pali Anurag, learned counsel for opposite party no.2 By means of this writ petition, the petitioner has assailed the judgement/order 24.03.2025 passed by Central Administrative Tribunal, Lucknow Bench, Lucknow in Original Application No.565 of 2024 whereby the Tribunal while setting aside the orders dated 25.07.2024 and 31.07.2024 has permitted the petitioner to shift the headquarter of respondent no.1 within the radius of 500 kms. Admittedly, the respondent no.1 is faced with the disciplinary proceedings as well as criminal trial. It is under these circumstances that in order to ensure his participation in the proceedings that the direction impugned herein has come to be issued by the Tribunal. Having regard to the reasoning put on record and consideration of the rival contentions made by the Tribunal, we do not find that the Tribunal by granting the relief as was sought has committed any error or illegality which may call for interference in exercise of extraordinary power of the Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. The writ petition bereft of any merit is accordingly rejected. (Shree Prakash Singh,J.) (Attau Rahman Masoodi,J.) Order Date :- 8.7.2025 Shahnaz SHAHNAZ BANO High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench