IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
WP(C).No. 28641 of 2009(A)
1. C.N.PRASAD, S/O.NARAYANAN,
... Petitioner
Vs
1. THE EMPLOYEES PROVIDENT FUND
... Respondent
2. THE ASSISTANT PROVIDENT FUND
3. THE RECOVERY OFFICER, EMPLOYEES
For Petitioner :SRI.B.MOHANLAL
For Respondent :SRI.N.N.SUGUNAPALAN (SR.)
The Hon'ble MR. Justice K.SURENDRA MOHAN
Dated :25/03/2010
O R D E R
K. SURENDRA MOHAN, J.
------------------------------------------------------------
W.P(C) NO: 28641 OF 2009
-----------------------------------------------------------
Dated this the 25th March, 2010.
JUDGMENT
The petitioner has filed this writ petition challenging the
action of the respondents in demanding contributions towards the
Employees Provident Fund as per an order passed under Section 7A
of the Employees Provident Fund and Miscellaneous Provisions Act,
1952 (the ‘Act’ for short). According to the petitioner, he was
remitting contributions regularly and without fail. He contends that
he has conducted the factory only from February 2006 to
September 2007. With respect to the said period contributions
have been made and there are no arrears due or payable by him.
In spite of the above, Ext.P3 order has been passed demanding
contributions from him for the period from November 2004 to
March 2007.
2. Disputing his liability to pay the amounts demanded the
petitioner had filed a petition for review under Section 7B.
However, the review was declined by Ext.P4. According to the
petitioner Ext.P4 has been passed without giving a proper
opportunity for the petitioner to place all the relevant materials in
support of his case. The petitioner also contends that he was sick
WPC 28641/2009 2
and therefore, not in a position to produce all his documents at the
appropriate time.
3. It is pointed out by the counsel for the respondents that
during the period covered by Ext.P5 Medical Certificate, the
petitioner himself had appeared before the second respondent on
15.4.2007. Therefore, it is submitted that the contentions of the
petitioner lacks bonafides. Further, though as many as seven
opportunities were given to the petitioner to produce documents, it
is contended that the opportunities were not availed of by the
petitioner. Therefore, he is not entitled to be granted any further
opportunity.
4. The counsel for the petitioner on the other hand refers to
Ext.P1 to point out that even as per the endorsement therein it is
clear that the factory had started functioning only with effect from
February 2006. Therefore, the petitioner could not be fastened
with the liability for any previous period. It is also pointed out that
relevant forms by which remittances were made periodically are all
in the possession of the respondents. The petitioner has produced
Ext.P6 series forms to support his contention that remittances were
being regularly made.
WPC 28641/2009 3
5. In view of the fact that there is no indication in Ext.P4 to
conclude that Exts.P6 and P7 series documents were taken into
account by the authority before passing Ext.P4 order, I think that
an opportunity can be granted to the petitioner to prove his case.
Ext.P4 order does not disclose a proper consideration of the
petitioner’s case. In view of the above Ext.P4 is unsustainable.
6. The order of the second respondent evidenced herein by
Ext.P4 issued under Section 7B of the Act is therefore set aside.
The second respondent is directed to consider the grievances of the
petitioner under Section 7B of the Act afresh, particularly taking
into account Exts.P6 and P7 series as well as any other documents
that may be produced by the petitioner at the time of hearing. The
orders as indicated above shall be issued by the second respondent
after giving an opportunity to the petitioner to produce documents
in support of his case and after affording an opportunity of being
heard. Until orders are passed in terms of the above directions,
coercive steps to enforce the order passed under Section 7A
evidenced herein by Ext.P3 shall be kept in abeyance.
K. SURENDRA MOHAN
Judge
jj
WPC 28641/2009 4
WPC 28641/2009 5
K.K.DENESAN & V. RAMKUMAR, JJ.
—————————————————-
M.F.A.NO:
—————————————————–
JUDGMENT
Dated: