IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CWJC No.5375 of 2008
M/S DINA IRON & STEEL LTD. HAVING ITS REGISTERED OFFICE
SITUATED AT KILA ROAD, AND WORKS AT ABDUL RAHMANPUR ROAD,
DIDARGANJ, PATNA- 800 009 THROUGH ONE OF ITS DIRECTORS, SANJAY KUMAR
BHARATIYA, S/O- LATE DINDAYAL BHARTIYA, RESIDENT OF RAMBAGH CHOWK,
P.S.- CHOWK, PATNA CITY, DISTRICT- PATNA :---- PETITIONER.
Versus
1. THE REGIONAL PROVIDENT FUND COMMISSIONER (C & R), BIHAR,
BHAVISHYANIDHI BHAVAN, 'R' BLOCK, ROAD NO. 6, PATNA.
2. THE EMPLOYEES PROVIDENT FUND APPELLATE TRIBUNAL
HAVING ITS OFFICE AT 60, SKY LARK BUILDING, NEHRU PLACE,
NEW DELHI-19 THROUGH ITS REGISTRAR.
3. THE ASSISTANT REGIONAL PROVIDENT FUND COMMISSIONER,
BHAVISHYANIDHI BHAVAN, 'R' BLOCK, ROAD NO. 6, PATNA.
4. THE RECOVERY OFFICER, OFFICE OF THE REGIONAL PROVIDENT
FUND COMMISSIONER, BHAVISHYANIDHI BHAVAN, 'R' BLOCK,
ROAD NO. 6, PATNA :--- RESPONDENTS.
-----------
3. 29.11.2010. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the
counsel for the Provident Fund Commissioner.
2. Petitioner-Establishment is aggrieved by the
order dated 30th April, 2004, Annexure-2 as also the
appellate order dated 27th August, 2007, Annexure-5,
whereunder the number of employees serving in the
Establishment for the period between July, 1998 to
March, 2003 has been increased.
3. It is submitted on behalf of the petitioner that
aforesaid order dated 30th April, 2004, Annexure-2 was
passed without hearing the counsel or the representative
of the Establishment. In this connection, it is submitted
that in the light of the notice the Establishment had to
appear before the Assistant Commissioner on 02.04.2004
but on 02.04.2004 the Assistant Commissioner was not
present in the office and the adjourned date was not
-2-
furnished to the representative of the Establishment who
went to appear before the Assistant Commissioner. In this
connection, reference has been made to the statements
made in paragraph-12, 13 of the writ petition which has
not been disputed in the counter affidavit. It is said that
without fixing any date for further hearing in the matter
the order dated 30.04.2004 was served on the petitioner
under letter dated 25.05.2004. Later, a corrigendum was
issued changing the date of the order dated 30.4.2004 to
22.04.2004 which was served on the petitioner under
letter dated 13.09.2004 contained in Annexure-4 to this
application. It is submitted on behalf of the petitioner that
before passing the order dated 30/22.04.2004 the report
on the basis of which the number of employees serving in
the Establishment has been increased was not served on
the petitioner and the Establishment had no opportunity
to rebut the allegation made in the report. As regards the
appellate order it is submitted that the appellate
authority has also not considered the effect of the
corrigendum in the light of the submission noted in
paragraphs 12 and 13 of the writ petition that pursuant
to the initial notice the representative of the
Establishment had appeared on 02.04.2004 when no
proceeding took place in the office of the Assistant
Regional Provident Fund Commissioner who was not
present in his office on that date. Perusal of the appellate
order dated 27th August, 2007, Annexure-5 also does not
-3-
disclose that the submission of the Establishment with
regard to the corrigendum has been considered in the
appellate order.
4. As the circumstances in which petitioner was
not heard by the Assistant Provident Fund Commissioner
on 02.04.2004 and the corrigendum dated 13.09.2004,
Annexure-4 was issued is not explained in the appellate
order, I proceed to set aside not only the original order
dated 22/30.04.2004, Annexure-2 but also the appellate
order dated 27th August, 2007, Annexure-5 directing the
petitioner to appear before the Assistant Provident Fund
Commissioner, Patna on 15th December, 2010 when the
Assistant Provident Fund Commissioner should supply
him the material(s) on the basis of which the
Commissionerate is proposing to increase the employees
in the Establishment during the period between July,
1998 to March, 2003 and fix further date for hearing and
dispose of the matter as early as possible, in any case,
within one month from the date of receipt/production of a
copy of this order.
5. The writ petition is, accordingly, disposed of.
(V.N.Sinha,J.)
P.K.P.