3.
IN THE HIGH comm 0;? KARNATAKA AT BAi\{g3+é§::;§3 1§t';E.§' - K
Bated tha 263" day of November 20.16
:BEF0RE;_
HON'BLE MR.JUSTI(3E : v.;1AQAr$;'N2miAN" ; ' 7
WRIT PETITICBN No. 2?5559 a09 ' %
W.I3.Nos. 26633, 2653;*;4,:"'::.u553s,.2e35A35 "
2755;; / 2099 Vf['1";v.+_Pfi'_}_ % :
In W.P.N0. 223555 1 2099" $ " .
BETWEEN :
Rcgiunalv V' "
No. 13, Efaja Mdhaggjcgg Road;
Bangalorg: -~. 56.002-5_g ' ~
The Regionai' Pre:§vidéi1t.'C»Qfli1:;iSsioner,
. . .Petiti011er
_( Sfioila, Advocate. }
Hospital i3vt. L1:d.,
a company ingzfixrporated under the
C0mpa.I1i{:s A(:'t, 1956, having its office at
N05. 16*/4..and 10/5, 3rd Main Road,
« Z ' -- _}ia;:11.1ma:1.:11ar;agara, Ba11ga10re~ I9,
_ .r§:pVr€:s==:nted by its Managng Director.
. . Respondent
( By Sri M.V.V.Ramana. Advocate. )
Writ Petition filed praying to issue a writ of
certierari and set aside the Gram' dated 30.332009 Vidfi
Am1exu:nr::~D, etc.
§'<J
In W.P.N0. 26633 / 2009 :
BETWEEN 2
The Regional Provident Fund .
Commissioner, -AA
Sub--Regi0I1a} Office, P.B.No.5'7i2. V
Ma1"1ga10re~--2, Dakshjna Ka11n.'ad__a. .
. V '=.,. ._:.?€:IZit;if3fl€I"
( By Sri Haxékfishlla S." 1:iGi.I£3.,V A€1v0c%ité;' I
A N D :
M/s Pretiaier we _
Bolar, Iviangaidrgz-71,. Kaiinarla,
rcpt. by its ;£'i1be1'i.J.L'}0e1I1o,
S/0 G.-J Aig":%,d.ab¢ut 74'"}'f..'<'1fS,
R/0 J?{aIaL1¢, _ --
Dakshiria Iiaxlnadzi; % _ "
" " ' V 7- " ...Re-spondent
fiigdvpraying to call for the records on
v. «;he~._ ;ii1§,, Appellate Tzibmlal in appeal
82; issue a writ of certiarari and set
asiiig-:__fhe dated 1.4.2009, Vida Annexure-E, etc.
W.P.N'§)''.s26634 / 2009 :
V T Regional Provident Fund Commissioner,
" , '. Sub«Reg'onal Office, P.B.N<).5'?2,
Ma1:1ga1ore»-M2, Dakshina Kannada.
. . . Petitioner
{ B}? Sri Hafiklishtla S.Ht3Ila. Advocatts. )
ANI):
185/ S Afllbtlqtlerque 85 Sons,
Sea View Hoiga Bazaar,
Ba-Iar, MangaIore~575 O81,
rapt. by its Managing Farmer
Geerge Albuquerque Pai,
3/ :3 Cyril Albuquczque,
Aged about 54 years.
.' ' ;_f§es}§'::)ndent
( By an A.§2Lf;»xo11a, 3
Writ Pe§itio.f: _'--fi1€§d ipfayixijg".j§*1:.Q_'__§%S$ue a writ: of
certziorari dated 1.4.2009, Vidé
Annexursefi, T}.
In W.P.N:). 25635' ;2V0<:xé§%Tk;l: %:' %
BETWEEN -
" vT_11%;:;
' Jaxniyjvatui Falah,
'=._B'eh:lnd Kmlkanady Masque, Kankanady,
.4 .. Mangalore, rep. by its Presidsnt
M1".HazdL1}Iah Ismail.
. . Respondent
( 8:9 Sri B.Lathif. Advocate.
far M/S Mufthi Law Chambers. )
A o*~..__£§ge(i aim: 54% years.
j Petition filed praying to Cali for the records on
_ file of EFF Appellate Tribunal appeal
:;No.A'}'A.6i5{)(6)2002 8a issue a writ of certiorari and set
Writ Petition filed praying to issue _
certiorari and set aside The order dated {fidéa-.[ '
AnI1exun=:--D, etc.
In W.P.N0. 26636 I 2089 :
BETWEEN :
The Regional Provident V. " '
Commissioner, ~--
Sub--Reg;iona1 Office. P.B;No.:57'2,' ' '_ A
Mangaiorcmfl , I{an:.1ad.a;'v V' V
...P€ti¥Zi0I1€1'
AS.'-Hoiiia, Advocate. 3
A N D : V d
M] s A.Albuquerq;1ev 85 So1;;_s,<..\
Sea View Hoiga '
Bolar, Iv§;'£ii1gal'or¢-- 1, Da$<:$hima Kannada,
1*:::pt§ by its Niéinaglng Parmer
Georga A1buq4uet'qg1e~- Pal',
S/<3 Albvziqyzerqzie,
.. Responderxt
" By Sri A.R.Holla, Advocate. )
aside the order dated 1.4.2009. Vida Annexure--{), etc.
In W.P.No. 27554 / 2009 :
BETWEEN :
The Regional Provident Fund Commissioner, V
Regional C)ffic&, Bangalora, . ' 2 dd
No.13. Raja Ram Mohan R0}; Road,
Bangalore -- 560 025.
. .A}3EEi?iQFiBI
( By Sri Hmmshna SA,_}.i§§1ia,"V.5§dv§iCat{:','A)
AND:
M/' S Macmifian J:£1d'i'é?L'--vLi1f1itr:d;, V. V
a company iI1CQi"r?ii}IfatC(i'11i1iiCF__t}IC
C0mpar3,iéS'dAc1i_;f, '
Rcg'stcri::_d €_)fi'1(:f,7' at. "No. 21_,' Patufios Road,
CheI1I1ai«'i300. GU12, da..Branch Ofiicc at
HMS Ambassador"13'?, Residency Raad,
Bangalore-66'6' {)V2.§V,":-rcpt. 'By its
_ .. _ Finallége hIi~anagerV.I»iV;f.R:;t.xnac}:1andran.
.. Respondent
Subramanya, Advocate,
. for Sri B.C.Prabhakar. )
wii;__A'§--'etitior: filed praying to call for the records on
file of the Efilployees' Provident Fund Appellate
dddddmimgm, New Deihi, in appeal No.ATA.406(6)'20{)5 and
VT adide the order dated 30.3.2009 (A11nexu:r6:--E)
--. fpassed by it, etc.
These petitions coming on far prelimi51a1'5: hearing
in' 'B' group this day, the court made tha following :
8
eeurt through the provisions of the Act agfid
part;i(:u1ar, referreci to Section 14»-B of the Act," A"' ii". .'
..
t). The second ground urged. ~bj,I_ nu
eeunsei is that the appellate
reduced the damages by 9
annum on the arrears Qf..Veon’t.risi.i§iei1,_hafir1g…re%md to
Pa1’ag£’ap11 3’2-A of the Funds
Scheme, 195:2 penalty couid
not have the fiefault in
making ‘E)e§;ond six mcmths in
respect izof ii employers concerned.
Therefore. Verrler ef appellate tribunal suffers
” v’fmm’-itiiese. two i11fir:i1’i’ties. As such, the order passed by
fine’ yefi;t.i_er;_e1′ estored.
(:3. eounsel Shri M.V.V.R’a1na11a, arguing on
“oikhe respendent in W.F’.N0. 27556/12009,
eeoijtezzded that a carefui reading of the entire provisions
. Act would go to show that the appellate tribunai
” has got all the powers which inciudes reducing the
penalty and this is clear from a cembirzeci reading of
4′:/.
«-
Sections ‘7-I, 7~J and 7~A and, therefore, the
that the appellate tribtmaj does not have ”
reduce the penalty ea}:1I1o%: be aeeepteci-.. A
7. As far as the rate of ifiifji’-.1_).V}r’
is conczemed, the submissien is dieeretion
is vested even wiith to reduce the
penalty and evenavs we Scheme.
the use of 2 ifeeover from the
emp10ye:’__t}y: that discretion is
vested as well to reduce the
damages a.’nc_1%’itj; mien the learned eolmsei also
_dre\v,.:=§:}’1§)poIT. ffezi1v:§%a_Ijag’aph 32~B of the Scheme.
__a.’I’he:”sL1″btni:f$siz>n of iearned ccnmsel Shri a.R.Helia
for the ree;3e1’1(ient in W.P.N0. 25534/20::;9 is that, 1:1
“to. Z the employel’ for whom he appears, the
A of the appellate tribunal in the impugned
*:::1″.deI’ is that the erlquiry Conducted sufiers from several
9′ ” “legal ixfiirmities aild, uncier the said circumstances, the
appellate t1*ib13.11al was justified in reducing the penalty
$0 33”?/is and he fu1’*t}’1er submitted that. if this court were
}
an
14
procedure before the tribune} and tha said A’
as under:
“7-I. Appeab ta Tribunal.
aggrieved by a I10fl1′”‘iCE§.tiOI1 :’i$é’3;_l’V'(%€’1 V’
Central Government, ord€:rV_pasus;%:§1A”‘:?:§y’*w~
the Centre} G0ver11meI1f_:__u_?: amy
under the provisui _fc. or
section (4) of sectioii for sub»-
section (i) except
an ,§1.p§3i§A{,:.’i’tiV<:)\IiVVV'for review
refeI'I'e:d.._ tb. V;'j;'1 3:9'1}.l:Vi;:/'$'<:z3i'::ii'(':iIf1 thereof, or
se¢tio..:1- '.148, may prefer an
_t.<:) against such
lgofificéiiiofi :1rTo1'iiér;' '
A V under Sub–s<:':ction (1)
% s.ha11'%%t;e:Tr~aed in such form and manner,
fime and be accompanied by
":3u<:i": "1"e11: of the
exercise of its powers or of the discharge of
its functians including the places at which
the Tribunal shali have its sittings.
– (1) The C’.o11%:1’a1 Provident Fund
E5
(:2) A Tribunal. shall, for the purpose ‘ ”
discharging its functions, have “‘
powers which are Vested in the _- «
referred to in section 7A ‘proooiéidiiig. _
before the Tribunal shall beidgégged i
judicial proceeding
sections 193 and 228, ihfi
section 196 of (45 of
1860) and the *mbui;sii”§e¢:med to
he a civil ociii1*t_ foij section
195 i Code of
Criiniiiezi l3;!;¢v”.’>’;'(:JfiE:€iii11;’1′(‘–:i,ViiA’.:lK.9«”.3’Vi’3A'(2 1974}. ”
Since siib-séotioii ‘{2}’ __i’¥’J mentions that the
tribunal shall hem: the -_po:§foIt§Wi1ich are vested in the
offloers r_oii:”:r§od io i1:i”‘Se:é:,:tio11 7A and the said section
si?i11Vhavé to and it reads as utiiderz
“‘?’A.”‘– Détéryiiriation of moneys due from
“«ij{_Joii:i’ri3issionor, any Additional Cezitral
‘ Piovident Fund Commissioner, any Deputy
* ‘ZPi”oVidont Fund Cominissioxier, any Regional
Provident Ifimd Commissioner, or any
Assistant Provident Fund Commissioner
%
, f
may, by order, —
I6
(3) in a case where a dispute a1fise:~§”‘.f””-
regarding the applieabiiity of this “-‘ff V
an establishment, decide such _rii3pi§te,”-T
and
{E3} det.eI’mine the a1nVount:”¢:11je_A.fro1i1v_–V_aI1y’. VV ”
employer under an§,?’~V..provisi’Q1i
Act, the Schen1e_____”‘er_ vghe “Pejnsioi%1
Scheme o1″t’§ie I;1’sL1;”af1c:c:.VV%S{:A1%1e111e, as
the case may be, _ 9
and for_vzi{11y::1ie<if. é:feress.#1id"' f;-urpoees may
ctonduet :§Qti§;11 as the 11135} deem
rieeessagtfiy
xiii} '1'}1e' "e:ind1}eting the i11qu1'ry'
1;s.1*1_vderLSuIu)s5e;f:1j(i'::1 ( shall, for the purposes
inqui.Vyf_,___have the same pewers as are
'A <::ourt: under the Code of Civil
Pi"0eee1»i:.1r€§~,..–:19{38 (5 of 1908), for trying a. suit
A Caf the foliowing nlatters, name1y:~
.. (3) enforcing the attendance sf 33:1};
person car examining him on oath;
{b} requiri11g the dj.se<)ve1*y and
proci21{:tioI1 of documents;
[(3) receiving evidence on affidavit;
[d} isssuir1g commissions for the
examination of witnesses,
%
—…a
i?
and any such ixiquirjv shaii be deemed
a judicia} pro<:eedi.11g Within the mea.n:i:;1g gf
sections 193 anti 228. and f<3J1ij;1f'1e '
seeiiien 196, of the Indian
1860). » %
(3; xxx i V
15. A Combined reandiiéigoi” ;e)f{jivieior1s of
the Act leaves no Vd<311bt'V:z'a%_se' appellate
tribunal as p.a:13s 'which are also
vested with ilijfi COfl'1I31iSSi()I1€I'.
The vests with the
RPFC, %:I;<?~3If§f:fé:)I;e," exercised by the appeilate
t1'i'b1.m_a1-vejven uwhen mattei' is taken by way of appeal
etders peesed by the RPFC. In View of the
afi?).reEsa.id~v f133;j('_)\I:i"svi{§:"1s of law, the power to reduce the
_da1né;'g3:es.«__'iree{'$ even with the appeliate tribunal. As
4 thewfiorltenticun put forward in this regard by the
'_ l_€€E'«I;£;1€3t§' counsel for the petitioner cannot: be accepted as
h'Eii?iI1g any force behind it.
16. As far as the levy of 15% by way of penalty and
damages bv the appeilate tliblmal is COI1C€I’I1(3d, this
court, in the case of Regional Provident Fund
%
E8
Commissioner, Mcmgalore. Vs. Jamiyyaml ‘IV .
Mcmgalore, reportetfi in ‘2’{}1(}~III LLJ 65:2,
at paragraphs– 13 and 14:
” 1.3. A;:3plyiI1g the afn:re$_Vai€1 “pi4i1″1ei[;;{ee..e:.vafV
Law, Section 14-13 _ne1:
I11aI1dE1t0I’}’ levy deeexiet
contemplate come of
damages i1’1VavII’la1;1i’1f:i’–:DI’ES(}f17ib<'$§. lie-éi'er para
32A of eggs :3£:1;es11;§s_'L%:9V5":.i f""'i'hough the
statutéiv' e.mup:l0yer eannot be
in 6'f""–<:i5.a111ages in all
miperative. The use of
the 'wefds in Section 14«8 of
the Aef, ._:i(ief1'i:ie'a1 £0 the very words in
35"-VB" **** 'ef the Employees' State
___C301'po1?;1ti011 Act, 1948, in the
'recovery of damages and levy of
A '—peI1eit}%A,i'~~' I11}? opiniorz, the levy of damages
urideir Section 14~»B of the Act is by way of
AA 'p.e11a1ty. The Legislature having limited the
ji§risdiei:ie£:1 of the a11thority to Kev}: penalty
net exceeding the amount referred to in
paragraph 324% of the EPF Scheme, 1952,
must be COI1S€'I'11€(i, keeping in View the
language clepioyed in the legisiative act and
not de hors the same.
fie
..I
26
Under those circumstalmes. the matters will have ,
rerrlazfled to the appellate tribunal to consider: V’
of the Cases on its ovm facts and :ci:’c3r11ns’tan:cc§s’v landfto
decide as to what; would be Vtlle doigragos
could be levied on each of {he
appellate tribunal comes rhat”]__:)enalty
by way of dalnages As the
imptigred ordorsl ‘–:.tl.1r:__V:l,fbzllsis on which
l5% per ‘-at by the appellate
txébunalg have to go back to
the appellato ro’–roofisider the above aspect in
V accorcéaflcc with
rétsult, all these petitions are allowed to the
e$§tcr::;V%.oi'”‘ ‘Caside the impugjned orders passed by
V . the and the matter star1ds remitted to
wappéyllote E:1’ib1_u”1al for fresh disposal in accordance
withm a period of six months from the date of
“–«.vVVré<§€ipt of a copy of this order.
Sd/-
JUDGE
Ckc/»«