IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA CIRCUIT BENCH AT DHARWAD DATED THIS THE 13TH DAY OF AUGUST,~«2§§§S__ " BEFORE THE HONBLE MR..IUsTIcI:~i jM;\LIIs(I;I$'1'IeI 3 I WRIT PETITION No.3o339 Ofiéoos 1 BETWEEN: Srifiasavaraj Kashappa ?.4atag:§:.:*,' " _' ». V Age: 52 years, Occ: Class ._i" 'Con'¢r:ac__« - R/0 Hidkal Dam.,.Tq: H.u}:er'i.~S91~_35t)'9, Dist: Be1gaum,..~._ _. ' V .. " ; .';"';"PE'l'I'l'IONER (BY 'S'RI..fi;S.I%15*Ih§A'£5E,'ADVG(5ATE.) 1. The Asst. pmvidehnwufiacommassioner, 4_Emp1oy¢;es Pxovident F'un.d Organization, Sub-Regiozm-11 Qifice, 4'fiI"F1oor, ':*'3a1;1I~e;erIaVthvC;>IzIp~1e_x, New Cotton Market, Hub1ir;580.v_G29. I v.:'2'§'vThe RegVional _1§IbI:ident Fund Commissioner, Sub~Reg§pi3a1 Officc, 4th Floor, " " ?".'SliI"cenafl1vVComplex, New Cotton Market, jijjbiii-5§30 029. . . . . RESPONDENTS
%£(\:_.,.w
***’k*
This writ petition is filed under Articles 226 and
227 of the Constitution of India praying to quasltithe.
impugned order dated 12.6.2008 and the ordetj ‘dated. 2.
25.7 .2008 passed by the first respondent at Aiifnexuifes
‘B’ and ‘D’ respectively and etc.
This petition coming on
this day, the Court made the following: ..
oRnER,VLi
The petitioner claiins to
undertaldng contract canals and
bridges from
Theirs’ is a the Employees
Provident Provisions Act,
1952. due to i11–hea1th, he
was unable Vxitoir e13.iit__ ivtiieefrovident Fund conuibution
of the fact that the contribution
‘of’ tiie». was not made, the respondent-
: V’ authoxities is;-5-Lia: a show cause notice to him asking
to the nomsubmission of the Provident
2 contribution. The petitioner did not appear before
Viizespondents. Accordingly, an ex parte order was
x@1\.»-»
passed vide Annexure–~B dated 12.6.2008 directing the
petitioner to pay the amount as mentioned
Within ten days from the date of receipt’ of
proceedings. Aggrieved by the same,’*’theé
a review petition while contending weLei”i-i.
from viral fever etc. and was to move’
pleaded that an opportunity to By
virtue of the ilnpugnedai the
review petition petition.
2. for the petitioner
submitted was suffering from viral
disease and.__the = serious in nature, the
..–v.;)etitioner_t1ras physically move about, that he
upto the end of 2007. He further
reliance on the medical certificate
‘dotedia vide AnnexuIe–A.7, i.e. issued after
tfiagsuig er the impugned order, to substantiate his
that he had a serious disease and could not
«:>££:’
attend the proceedings before the respondent-
authorities.
3. : have heard the ieamecf
Sri.B.S.Kamate, appearing for fl1e:petjtioner;””4
4. Peruse} of the impugned order dated’ L.
shows that the to the
petitioner as back as even
on a single detey’ the.-” before the
respondents. have
consisitentlgr wliziatter on about 20
occasions. a reasonabie opportunity to
the .;j;5etii:ioner’ Viznavke out his case. Inspite of large
in Tofu: 4d«.:1tes being given to the petitioner, he has
before the concerned authorities. On
–V the’.4’oonfrai’3}’, he contends in the review petition that he
if if V [was tinweii and therefore could not attend the
The statement of the petitioner runs
” to the facts of the case. The impugned order
Q&:—
discloses that one such arrest warrant dated
26.12.2007 was sought to be served on the ._
The police authorities have endorsed that
had gone to Bangalore. Inspite of’the’*sanj;e, \tr’as”.,A u
again adjourned on number of oceasions, which
shows that prime. faeie, the tacks’
Further, the medical not
infuse any confidence suffering
from the disease: attending the
was genuinely
‘ prevented his
nothing prevented
him fies; ‘sueh request to the authorities. The
t that ddddd no request was made to the
A was an adjournment sought for on that
d d . g1’oi;md..-._”I’ not find any bone. fides of the petitioner
. .. __I Ooncnr with the impug1ed order passed by
authorities. Substantial lenience have been shown
T he the petitioner. The petitioner having failed to avail of
ML”
the same and when unsubstantiacd pleas are put-
forth, there is no remml as to why this Court should
interfere in the order passed by the mspondent—§V.:«..”‘A.[: : _
authorities.
5. For the aforesaid rcasans, the ‘A
devoid of merits is rejected. V» d . V .
9ng/- &