GARRISON SECURITAS Vs. REGIONAL PROVIDENT FUND COMMISSIONER

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Ms. Jahnavi Singh, learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Standing counsel for the State-respondent nos. 1 & 2 in both the petitions.

(2.) The order sheet of Writ-C No.39298 of 2025 reflects that an objection was raised by the learned Standing Counsel regarding entertainability of the said writ petition in view of availability of alternative remedy of statutory appeal. However, the Court noted the argument of petitioner side to the effect that the order imposing damages has been passed in violation of principles of natural justice and then granted time to the learned Standing counsel to obtain instructions.

(3.) Instructions have been produced by the learned standing counsel stating that the order impugned has not been passed in violation of principles of natural justice, rather a notice was issued to the petitioner that was also replied by the petitioner. Further, reference to first paragraph of the impugned order dtd. 10/10/2024 has been made where issuance of notice has been recorded and, in second paragraph of the impugned order, submissions of Sh. Nathi Ram, representative of the petitioner establishment were noted during the course of hearing.