EMPLOYEES PROVIDENT FUND ORGANISATION vs M/S ENGINECH INDUSTRIES — 1427/2019
Case under Employees' State Insurance Act, 1948 Section 39,40. Status: Plea. Next hearing: 30th June 2026.
CC - CRIMINAL CASE
CNR: GJVD150048372018
Filing Number
1427/2019
Filing Date
20-Feb-2015
Registration No
1427/2019
Registration Date
20-Feb-2015
Court
LABOUR COURT, VADODARA
Judge
1-Judge, Labour Court
Last updated 10-Jun-2026
FIR Details
Police Station
MAKARPURA POLICE STATION - VADODARA DISTRICT
Year
0
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
-
1.EMPLOYEES PROVIDENT FUND ORGANISATION
Adv. APP
Respondent(s)
-
1.M/S ENGINECH INDUSTRIES
-
2.MANOJ R. PATEL
Case History
-
30-Jun-2026
Next hearingPending
-
26-May-2026
Plea
Judge, Labour Court
-
27-Apr-2026
OrderView PDF
Case Summary: Criminal Case 1427/2019 PETITIONER: Employees Provident Fund Organisation (EPFO) RESPONDENTS: M/S Enginech Industries and Manoj R. Patel COURT: Magistrate Court, Vadodara OUTCOME: CASE ADJOURNED/STAYED PENDING The court adjourned the case and stayed further proceedings pending the outcome of a challenge to the underlying inspection orders in the Gujarat High Court. The EPFO's complaint was based on inspection reports from August 20, 2014, which led to orders under Section 45/A of the ESI Act, 1948 on December 15, 2014 and November 9, 2015. However, the respondents successfully challenged these orders in the High Court, which declared both orders illegal and set them aside (February 16, 2019 and March 2, 2019). The court found the underlying inspection was allegedly conducted with bias and malice, and held that once the foundational orders are nullified, any subsequent criminal proceedings lose legal basis. The court directed the EPFO to inform the court of the High Court's final decision before proceeding further with this case. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
-
27-Apr-2026
Plea
Judge, Labour Court
-
18-Apr-2026
Plea
Judge, Labour Court
-
16-Apr-2026
Plea
Judge, Labour Court
-
09-Apr-2026
Plea
Judge, Labour Court
-
27-Mar-2026
Plea
Judge, Labour Court
-
14-Mar-2026
Plea
Judge, Labour Court
-
21-Feb-2026
Plea
Judge, Labour Court
-
03-Jan-2026
Plea
Judge, Labour Court
-
06-Dec-2025
Plea
Judge, Labour Court
-
18-Oct-2025
Plea
Judge, Labour Court
-
16-Oct-2025
Plea
Judge, Labour Court
-
18-Sep-2025
Plea
Judge, Labour Court
-
28-Aug-2025
Plea
Judge, Labour Court
-
22-Aug-2025
Plea
Judge, Labour Court
-
19-Aug-2025
Plea
Judge, Labour Court
-
05-Aug-2025
Plea
Judge, Labour Court
-
15-Jul-2025
Plea
Judge, Labour Court
-
08-Jul-2025
Plea
Judge, Labour Court
-
01-Jul-2025
Plea
Judge, Labour Court
-
24-Jun-2025
Plea
Judge, Labour Court
-
19-Jun-2025
Plea
Judge, Labour Court
-
12-Jun-2025
Process To Accused
Judge, Labour Court
-
05-Jun-2025
Process To Accused
Judge, Labour Court
-
17-Apr-2025
Process To Accused
Judge, Labour Court
-
13-Mar-2025
Process To Accused
Judge, Labour Court
-
27-Feb-2025
Process To Accused
Judge, Labour Court
-
30-Jan-2025
Process To Accused
Judge, Labour Court
-
12-Dec-2024
Process To Accused
Judge, Labour Court
-
14-Nov-2024
Process To Accused
Judge, Labour Court
-
24-Oct-2024
Process To Accused
Judge, Labour Court
-
19-Sep-2024
Process To Accused
Judge, Labour Court
-
18-Jul-2024
Process To Accused
Judge, Labour Court
-
30-May-2024
Process To Accused
Judge, Labour Court
-
04-Apr-2024
Process To Accused
Judge, Labour Court
-
15-Feb-2024
Process To Accused
Judge, Labour Court
-
21-Dec-2023
Process To Accused
Judge, Labour Court
-
19-Oct-2023
Process To Accused
Judge, Labour Court
-
17-Aug-2023
Process To Accused
Judge, Labour Court
-
08-Jun-2023
Process To Accused
Judge, Labour Court
-
13-Apr-2023
Process To Accused
Judge, Labour Court
-
16-Feb-2023
Process To Accused
Judge, Labour Court
-
15-Dec-2022
Process To Accused
Judge, Labour Court
-
13-Oct-2022
Process To Accused
Judge, Labour Court
-
18-Aug-2022
Process To Accused
Judge, Labour Court
-
09-Jun-2022
Process To Accused
Judge, Labour Court
-
21-Apr-2022
Process To Accused
Judge, Labour Court
-
24-Mar-2022
Process To Accused
Judge, Labour Court
-
27-Jan-2022
Process To Accused
Judge, Labour Court
-
20-Nov-2021
Process To Accused
Judge, Labour Court
-
14-Oct-2021
Process To Accused
Judge, Labour Court
-
23-Sep-2021
Process To Accused
Judge, Labour Court
-
26-Aug-2021
Process To Accused
Judge, Labour Court
-
03-Jun-2021
Process To Accused
Judge, Labour Court
-
15-Apr-2021
Process To Accused
Judge, Labour Court
-
24-Mar-2021
Process To Accused
Judge, Labour Court
-
17-Feb-2021
Process To Accused
Judge, Labour Court
-
13-Jan-2021
Process To Accused
Judge, Labour Court
-
09-Dec-2020
Process To Accused
Judge, Labour Court
-
16-Oct-2020
Process To Accused
Judge, Labour Court
-
21-Aug-2020
Process To Accused
Judge, Labour Court
-
19-Jun-2020
Process To Accused
Judge, Labour Court
-
10-Apr-2020
Process To Accused
Judge, Labour Court
-
07-Feb-2020
Process To Accused
Judge, Labour Court
-
19-Dec-2019
Process To Accused
Judge, Labour Court
-
24-Oct-2019
Process To Accused
Judge, Labour Court
-
01-Oct-2019
Process To Accused
Judge, Labour Court
-
27-Aug-2019
Process To Accused
Judge, Labour Court
-
25-Jun-2019
Process To Accused
Judge, Labour Court
-
04-May-2019
Process To Accused
Judge, Labour Court
-
09-Mar-2019
First hearing
Initial hearing scheduled
-
20-Feb-2015
Case filed
Registration No. 1427/2019
Case Summary: Criminal Case 1427/2019 PETITIONER: Employees Provident Fund Organisation (EPFO) RESPONDENTS: M/S Enginech Industries and Manoj R. Patel COURT: Magistrate Court, Vadodara OUTCOME: CASE ADJOURNED/STAYED PENDING The court adjourned the case and stayed further proceedings pending the outcome of a challenge to the underlying inspection orders in the Gujarat High Court. The EPFO's complaint was based on inspection reports from August 20, 2014, which led to orders under Section 45/A of the ESI Act, 1948 on December 15, 2014 and November 9, 2015. However, the respondents successfully challenged these orders in the High Court, which declared both orders illegal and set them aside (February 16, 2019 and March 2, 2019). The court found the underlying inspection was allegedly conducted with bias and malice, and held that once the foundational orders are nullified, any subsequent criminal proceedings lose legal basis. The court directed the EPFO to inform the court of the High Court's final decision before proceeding further with this case. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Explore other courts