High Court Madras High Court

M/S.Sibaflor Natural … vs Assistant Provident Fund … on 10 June, 2009

Madras High Court
M/S.Sibaflor Natural … vs Assistant Provident Fund … on 10 June, 2009
       

  

  

 
 
 BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT

DATED: 10/06/2009

CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE M.SATHYANARAYANAN

W.P(MD)No.4554 of 2009
and
M.P(MD)No.1 of 2009

M/s.Sibaflor Natural Decorations Pct.Ltd.,
(Formerly known as M/s.W.Hogewoning
Dried Flowers Industries Pvt.Ltd),
2/101-2/108, Ettayapuram Road
A.Kumarapuram, Melamaruthur
Kurukkuchalai, Tuticorin-628 722
Rep.by its Director		  		. . . Petitioner

Vs.

1.	Assistant Provident Fund Commissioner,
  	Employees' Provident Fund Organisation,
  	Sub Regional Office, Bhavishya Nidhi Bhavan,
  	NGO "B" Colony, Tirunelveli-627 007.

2.	The Manager,
  	Tamilnad Mercantile Bank Ltd.,
  	Beach Road, Tuticorin.			. . . Respondents

PRAYER

Writ petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India,
praying to issue a Writ of Mandamus, forbearing the respondents from in any
manner taking action against the petitioner in pursuance of the notice
No.TN/TNY/41151/CD-11/PDC(14B)/2009, dated 27.04.2009 during the pendency of the
appeal filed before the Hon'ble EPF Appellate Tribunal, New Delhi by the
petitioner against the 14 B order dated 12.03.2009.

!For Petitioner		... Mr.P.Srinivas
^For 1st Respondent	... Mr.K.Muralishankar
			    Standing  Counsel for EPF
				
					  * * * *
:ORDER

Heard the submissions of Mr.P.Srinivas, the learned counsel for the
petitioner and Mr.K.Muralishankar, the learned Standing Counsel appearing for
the first respondent.

2. The petitioner due to continued crisis prevailing in the business was
unable to remit EPF contribution on time. Therefore, the first respondent has
initiated proceedings under Section 14B of the Employees Provident Fund Act and
passed an order dated 12.03.2009, demanding a sum of Rs.2,33,412/- as damages.

3. The petitioner being aggrieved by the said order, preferred an appeal
to EPF Appellate Tribunal, New Delhi, on 25.04.2009 and it was also acknowledged
by the said Tribunal on 27.04.2009. The petitioner pending disposal of the
Statutory Appeal has also sought for stay for the order of recovery.

4. The learned Counsel appearing for the petitioner would submit that
steps are being taken to number the appeal and in the meanwhile, the first
respondent is taking coercive steps to recover the amount by way of damages and
therefore, the learned counsel for the petitioner prays for stay of the order
dated 12.03.2009, passed by the first respondent. He would further submit that
as per the Circular and Gazette, the petitioner is liable to pay damages to the
tune of Rs.86,143/- only.

5. The Court, after hearing the submissions of the counsel on either side,
is of the view that the pending disposal of the appeal, the petitioner is to
deposit some amount to protect its interest.

6. Accordingly, the petitioner is directed to deposit a sum of
Rs.1,00,000/- to the first respondent within a period of 8 weeks from the date
of receipt of a copy of this order and also take necessary steps to number the
Statutory Appeal filed before EPF Appellate Tribunal, New Delhi.

7. In the event of default committed by the petitioner for complying with
this order, it is open to the first respondent to proceed further in terms of
the order dated 12.03.2009.

8. With the above direction, the Writ Petition is disposed of.
Consequently, connected Miscellaneous Petition is closed. No costs.

ssl/vsg

To

1. Assistant Provident Fund Commissioner,
Employees’ Provident Fund Organisation,
Sub Regional Office, Bhavishya Nidhi Bhavan,
NGO “B” Colony, Tirunelveli-627 007.

2. The Manager,
Tamilnad Mercantile Bank Ltd.,
Beach Road, Tuticorin.