REGIONAL PROVIDENT FUND COMMISSIONER vs U P RAJKIYA NIRMAN NIGAM LIMITED — WPMB/1047/2025

Case under Under Article 227 of the Constituion of India Section 227. Next hearing: : -.

Next hearing —

CNR: UKHC010194782025

Filing Number

WPMB/9427/2025

Filing Date

05-Dec-2025

Registration No

WPMB/1047/2025

Registration Date

05-Dec-2025

Judge

Hon'ble Shri Justice Manoj Kumar Gupta , Hon'ble Mr. Justice Subhash Upadhyay

Coram

Hon'ble Shri Justice Manoj Kumar Gupta , Hon'ble Mr. Justice Subhash Upadhyay

Bench Type

Division Bench

Category

MISC WRIT PETITION ( 2 )

Sub-Category

MISC MATTERS ( 47 )

Judicial Branch

ALL SECTIONS (CIVIL AND CRIMINAL)

Last updated 02-Jun-2026

Acts & Sections

Under Article 227 of the Constituion of India Section 227

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.REGIONAL PROVIDENT FUND COMMISSIONER

    Adv. RAVI SEHGAL

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.U P RAJKIYA NIRMAN NIGAM LIMITED

Case History

  1. —

    Next hearingPending

  2. 01-Jun-2026

    Hon'ble Shri Justice Manoj Kumar Gupta,Hon'ble Mr. Justice Subhash UpadhyayView PDF

    Case Summary: WPMB 1047/2025 On 01.06.2026, the petition by Regional Provident Fund Commissioner against U.P. Rajkiya Nirman Nigam Ltd. was heard before a Division Bench (Chief Justice Manoj Kumar Gupta and Justice Subhash Upadhyay). The petitioner's counsel requested the matter be listed before a Single Judge, citing that identical matters have been cognizable by a Single Judge Bench. The Court directed the Office to examine this aspect and submit a fresh report, with the case adjourned for listing next week before the appropriate Bench. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

  3. 08-Dec-2025

    Fresh Cases As Defective -236

    Registrar (Judicial)

  4. 05-Dec-2025

    Case filed

    Registration No. WPMB/1047/2025

casestatus.in Summary

Case Summary: WPMB 1047/2025 On 01.06.2026, the petition by Regional Provident Fund Commissioner against U.P. Rajkiya Nirman Nigam Ltd. was heard before a Division Bench (Chief Justice Manoj Kumar Gupta and Justice Subhash Upadhyay). The petitioner's counsel requested the matter be listed before a Single Judge, citing that identical matters have been cognizable by a Single Judge Bench. The Court directed the Office to examine this aspect and submit a fresh report, with the case adjourned for listing next week before the appropriate Bench. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

District Courts Supreme Court
Search Another Case