High Court Kerala High Court

M/S. Haileyburia Tea Estate Ltd vs The Regional Provident Fund on 11 March, 2009

Kerala High Court
M/S. Haileyburia Tea Estate Ltd vs The Regional Provident Fund on 11 March, 2009
       

  

  

 
 
  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

WP(C).No. 7479 of 2009(D)


1. M/S. HAILEYBURIA TEA ESTATE LTD.,
                      ...  Petitioner

                        Vs



1. THE REGIONAL PROVIDENT FUND
                       ...       Respondent

2. EMPLOYEES PROVIDENT FUND APPELLATE

                For Petitioner  :SRI.JOSEPH KODIANTHARA

                For Respondent  :SRI.JOY THATTIL ITOOP, SC, EPF ORGANISA

The Hon'ble MR. Justice ANTONY DOMINIC

 Dated :11/03/2009

 O R D E R
                        ANTONY DOMINIC, J.
                   -------------------------
                     W.P.(C.) No.7479 of 2009
             ---------------------------------
             Dated, this the 11th day of March, 2009

                           J U D G M E N T

Petitioner is an establishment covered under the provisions of

the Employees Provident Funds and Miscellaneous Provisions Act.

On account of delay in paying the contribution that is due, by Exts.P6

& P7 orders, damages under Section 14B of the Act and interest

under Section 7Q of the Act have been levied on the petitioner.

2. Aggrieved by Ext.P6 order levying damages, they have

filed Ext.P8 appeal before the 2nd respondent Tribunal. Similarly,

aggrieved by Ext.P7, they have filed Ext.P9 representation to the

Ministry of Labour, which has not been impleaded in this writ

petition. Prayer made is to direct consideration of Exts.P8 & P9. The

learned standing counsel for the Organisation objects to the

maintainability of Ext.P9 and contends that only the Employees

Provident Fund Trust can consider the representation. The petitioner

also has not pointed out any provision of law, enabling the

Government of India to interfere with an order levying interest.

3. Taking into account the above, the writ petition is

WP(C) No.7479/2009
-2-

disposed of with the following directions:-

That the 2nd respondent, before whom Ext.P8 appeal against Ext.P6

order levying damages on the petitioner under Section 14B of the

Act has been filed, shall consider Ext.P8 appeal. This shall be done

as expeditiously as possible, at any rate, within three months of

production of a copy of this judgment.

4. Taking into account the objection raised by the learned

standing counsel for the respondents about the maintainability of

Ext.P9, I direct that it will be open to the petitioner to approach the

Employees Provident Fund Trust seeking waiver or revision of

interest. This the petitioner may do within four weeks from today.

It is directed that if an application is received as above, the Trust

shall consider the same and pass orders thereon as expeditiously as

possible.

5. In order to enable the petitioner to pursue the aforesaid

remedies, I also direct that further proceedings pursuant to Exts.P6

& P7 be kept in abeyance for a period of three months from today.

The writ petition is disposed of as above.

(ANTONY DOMINIC, JUDGE)
jg