1 2025:CGHC:12963 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCC No. 267 of 2025 • Central Board Of Trustees, EPF, Through - Assistant Provident Fund Commissioner Employees’ Provident Fund Organization Regional Office, Raipur (C.G.) Block-D, Scheme No. 32, Indira Gandhi Commercial Complex, Pandri, Raipur (C.G.) Pin- 492004. ... Petitioner/Applicant versus • M/s Best Security Services, Through Its Proprietor, Kuldeep Chaturvedi, S/o Shri Rajkishore Chaturvedi, Aged About 43 Years, Having Office At Flat No.30, Third Floor, Usha Kiran Parisar, Behind Jagriti School, Bhatagaon, Raipur (C.G.). ... Respondent (Cause title taken from Case Information System) For Petitioner/Applicant : Mr. Sunil Pillai, Advocate. For Respondent : Mr. Shishir Dixit, Advocate. Hon'ble Shri Justice Naresh Kumar Chandravanshi Order on Board 19/03/2025 1. Heard. 2. This MCC has been preferred by the applicant seeking extension of period to conclude enquiry of Diary (Case) No.170/2021. 3. Vide order dated 24.10.2024 (Annexure-A/1), this Court has passed the following order in WP(L) No.216/2024 in paragraphs 4, 5 & 6 :- “4. Having considered the limited prayer of the petitioner and further considering the fact that the said enquiry has been initiated in the year 2021, despite that, it has not been concluded yet, therefore, the respondent authority is directed to conclude the aforesaid enquiry of Diary (Case) No.170/2021 initiated by respondent against the petitioner under Section 7-A of the EPF Act within a period of 4 months from today. 5. The petitioner is directed to cooperate with the respondent authority for expeditious disposal of the case. 6. With the aforesaid observation(s) and direction(s), this petition stands disposed of.” 2 4. Learned counsel for the applicant would submit that in pursuance of order dated 24.10.2024 (Annexure-A/1) Enforcement Officer had submitted the enquiry report before Enquiry Officer/Regional PF Commissioner II Raipur (C.G.), which was quashed by the Co-ordinate Bench of this High Court in WP(L) No.11/2025 (Annexure-A/2) vide order dated 10.01.2025 on the ground that aforesaid order was passed without supplying any document to the establishment. He further submitted that in pursuance of order passed in WP(L) No.11/2025, documents were supplied vide Annexure-A/3 dated 15.01.2025 to the establishment, therefore, delay has occurred in completing the enquiry. Hence, he seeks further period of 3 months to conclude the enquiry in compliance of order dated 24.10.2024 (Annexure-A/1). 5. Counsel appearing for the respondent has raised objection that applicant is deliberately making delay in enquiry, therefore, strict view be taken against him. 6. Having considered the contentions made by the learned counsel for the parties, particularly considering the order dated 10.01.2025 (Annexure-A/2) passed in WP(L) No.11/2025, I feel inclined to grant further period of 3 months from today, i.e., 19.03.2025 to comply with the order dated 24.10.2024 (Annexure-A/1) passed in WP(L) No. 216/2024 with a strict direction that enquiry shall be concluded within the period prescribed by this Court. 7. Accordingly, instant MCC stands disposed of. Sd/- (Naresh Kumar Chandravanshi) Judge DEEPTI JHA NIRALA Digitally signed by DEEPTI JHA NIRALA