Bombay High Court
NESTOR HOTELS PVT LTDversusASSISTANT PROVIDENT FUND COMMISSIONER KANDIVALI
- Decided
- Disposal
- Disposed Off
Holding
The writ petition is not maintainable as the petitioner has an alternative remedy under Section 7‑I of the Employees’ Provident Funds and Miscellaneous Provisions Act, 1952, and the petition is therefore disposed.
Summary
Nestor Hotels Pvt. Ltd. filed a writ petition before the Bombay High Court challenging the actions of the Assistant Provident Fund Commissioner, Kandivali. The petitioner argued that the High Court should entertain the petition despite the existence of an alternative remedy under Section 7‑I of the Employees’ Provident Funds and Miscellaneous Provisions Act, 1952. The Court observed that the statutory scheme provides a specific appeal mechanism and therefore declined to interfere with the administrative decision. It disposed of the writ petition while leaving open the option of filing an appeal under the said provision. Additionally, the Court directed that time spent on the review and the present petition be excluded from the limitation period if an appeal is filed within one week.
Issues considered
- What is the maintainability of a writ petition when an alternative statutory appeal under Section 7‑I of the EPF Act, 1952, is available?
- How should the limitation period be computed for filing the appeal if the petitioner has pursued a review and a writ petition?
Legislation cited
Subjects
- Writ petition
- Alternative remedy
- Section 7‑I
- Employees’ Provident Funds Act
- Limitation period
- High Court of Bombay
- Appeal
Judgment
Neeta Sawant 15-WP--10509-2026.docx
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
WRIT PETITION NO. 10509 OF 2026
Nestor Hotels Pvt. Ltd. …..Petitioner
: Versus :
Assistant Provident Fund Commissioner
Kandivali ….Respondent
Ms. Kiran Singh with Ms. Mahima Nallaseri, for the Petitioner.
Mrs. Shehnaz V. Bharucha, for the Respondent.
CORAM : SANDEEP V. MARNE, J.
DATED : 19 AUGUST 2026.
P.C :
1) Considering the fact that there is alternate remedy of filing
Appeal under Section 7-I of the Employees’ Provident Funds and
Miscellaneous Provisions Act, 1952, this Court is not inclined to
entertain the present petition. Leaving open the remedy of filing Appeal,
the Writ Petition is disposed of.
2) The time spent in prosecuting the Review Petition and the
present petition shall be excluded while computing the period of
limitation if the Appeal is filed within one week.
Digitally
signed by
NEETA
NEETA SHAILESH
SHAILESH SAWANT
SAWANT Date:
2026.08.20
15:03:17
+0530
[SANDEEP V. MARNE, J.]
_____________________________________________________________________________
PAGE NO. 1 of 1
Wednesday, 19 August 2026
Checking your session…