Technibharati Ltd vs Assistant Provident … on 24 July, 2008

       

  

  

 
 
  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

WP(C).No. 21762 of 2008(N)


1. TECHNIBHARATI LTD.,
                      ...  Petitioner

                        Vs



1. ASSISTANT PROVIDENT COMMISSIONER
                       ...       Respondent

2. EMPLOYEES PROVIDENT FUND APPELLATE

                For Petitioner  :SRI.JOMY GEORGE

                For Respondent  :SRI.N.N. SUGUNAPALAN, SC, P.F.

The Hon'ble MR. Justice S.SIRI JAGAN

 Dated :24/07/2008

 O R D E R
                             S. Siri Jagan, J.
               =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=--=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
                      W. P (C) No. 21762 of 2008
               =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=--=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
                    Dated this, the 24th  July, 2008.

                            J U D G M E N T

The petitioner is an establishment covered under the Employees

Provident Funds and Miscellaneous Provisions Act. In respect of

delay in payment of contributions for certain periods, the 1st

respondent initiated proceedings for recovery of damages under

Section 14B which has resulted in Exts. P1 and P2 orders. Against

these orders, the petitioner filed two appeals, namely, Exts.P3 and P4.

Petitioner’s grievance is that while the appeals are pending, by Ext.

P5, coercive recovery proceedings have been initiated. The

petitioner challenges the same on the ground that it is unjust on the

part of the 1st respondent to initiate proceedings for recovery while

the appeals are pending.

2. I have heard the learned standing counsel for the Provident

Fund Organisation also.

3. I am satisfied that it is not proper for the 1st respondent to

initiate coercive recovery proceedings while the appeals are pending.

But, in so far as the petitioner cannot say that they are not liable for

any damages at all, I am of opinion that they shall pay a part of the

amount now demanded from them. In the above circumstances, the

writ petition is disposed of as follows:

The 2nd respondent shall consider and pass appropriate orders

on Exts. P3 and P4 appeals as expeditiously as possible. Till disposal

of the appeals, further proceedings for coercive recovery pursuant to

Exts. P1 and P2 including proceedings under Ext. P5 shall be kept in

abeyance on condition that the petitioner pays an amount of Rs. 1

lakh within one month.

Sd/- S. Siri Jagan, Judge.

Tds/

[True copy]

P.S to Judge.