Colachel Municipality ATHIMOOLAPANDIAN P vs The Regional Provident Fund Commissioner- II — WP(MD)/14329/2026
Case under Others Section Others. Disposed: Uncontested--DISPOSED OF on 21st May 2026.
CNR: HCMD010677412026
e-Filing Number
19-05-2026
Filing Number
WP(MD)/41597/2026
Filing Date
19-May-2026
Registration No
WP(MD)/14329/2026
Registration Date
19-May-2026
Judge
Honourable Mr Justice D.bharatha Chakravarthy
Coram
Honourable Mr Justice D.bharatha Chakravarthy
Bench Type
Single Bench
Category
Provident Fund ( 127 )
Judicial Branch
Writ Section
Decision Date
21-May-2026
Nature of Disposal
Uncontested--DISPOSED OF
Last updated 30-May-2026
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
-
1.Colachel Municipality ATHIMOOLAPANDIAN P
Respondent(s)
-
1.The Regional Provident Fund Commissioner- II
-
2.The Recovery Officer
Case History
-
Case disposedDisposed
-
21-May-2026
Honourable Mr Justice D.bharatha ChakravarthyView PDF
The Madurai High Court admitted Colachel Municipality's writ petition challenging EPF assessment and recovery orders, finding a prima facie case on the key issue: whether assessment proceedings can proceed under the repealed 1952 EPF Act (Section 7A) or the new 2020 Social Security Code (Section 124) when the original scheme remains intact pending new scheme framing. The court granted interim stay of the impugned orders and consolidated the petition with similar cases, while preserving the petitioner's limitation period rights if an appeal becomes necessary. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
-
21-May-2026
For Admission (Provident Fund)
Honourable Mr Justice D.bharatha Chakravarthy
-
20-May-2026
First hearing
Initial hearing scheduled
-
19-May-2026
Case filed
Registration No. WP(MD)/14329/2026
The Madurai High Court admitted Colachel Municipality's writ petition challenging EPF assessment and recovery orders, finding a prima facie case on the key issue: whether assessment proceedings can proceed under the repealed 1952 EPF Act (Section 7A) or the new 2020 Social Security Code (Section 124) when the original scheme remains intact pending new scheme framing. The court granted interim stay of the impugned orders and consolidated the petition with similar cases, while preserving the petitioner's limitation period rights if an appeal becomes necessary. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Explore other courts