Dismissed

The Regional Provident Fund Commissioner v. Sawant Food Products Ltd.

Bombay HC23 Jun 2011WP/3218/2011

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The petitioner challenged the Appellate Tribunal's order reducing interest under the Employees Provident Fund Act. The bench held the proviso to Section 14B does not restrict the Tribunal's power, relying on the Kolkata High Court, and dismissed the writ petition summarily.

What did the court decide?

The writ petition challenging the Appellate Tribunal's order reducing interest is dismissed summarily.

The Regional Provident Fund Commissioner Vs… — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Bombay HC (2011)

wp3218-11

ttm

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

¶5

CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

¶6

WRIT PETITION NO.3218 OF 2011

¶7

The Regional Provident Fund Commissioner, Thane .. Petitioner Vs. M/s.Sawant Food Products Ltd. .. Respondent

¶8

Ms.Milam Jadhav i/b Mr.Sureshkumar for the petitioner

¶9

None for the respondent

¶10

CORAM: K.K. TATED, J. DATE: 23^th JUNE, 2011

¶11

P.C.

¶12

Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner.

¶13

By this petition, under Article 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner original respondent challenges the order passed by the learned Presiding Officer of Employees Provident Fund Appellate’ Tribunal, New Delhi in Appeal No.ATA 433(9)2004 allowing partly respondent’s appeal reducing the rate of interest and remanding the matter to the authority to calculate the same.

¶14

The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that in view of the proviso of section 14B of the Employees Provident Fund and Misc.Provisions Act,’

¶15

wp3218-11

¶16

¶17

1952, the Appellate Tribunal have no jurisdiction to reduce or waive the interest. The said proviso reads as under:

¶18

“[Provided further that the Central Board may reduce or waive the damages levied under this section in relation to an establishment which is a sick industrial company and in respect of which a scheme for rehabilitation has been sanctioned by the Board for Industrial and Financial Reconstruction established under section 4 of the Sick Industrial Companies (Special Provisions) Act, 1985, (1 of 1986) subject to such terms and condition as may be specified in the scheme].

¶19

Bare reading of the said proviso shows that there is no restriction on Appellate Tribunal to reduce the rate of interest. Not only that the appellate authority remanded back the matter to the authority with a direction to assess interest at the rate of 17%. The Appellate Tribunal relied on the Judgment of Kolkata High Court in the case of Vikram Poddar vs. RPFRC reorted in 2001 Vol II LJ at pg 518. It is crystal clear from section 14B of the said Act that there is no restriction on Appellate Authority’s power to reduce the interest rate.

¶20

Considering these facts, I do not find any substance in the present Writ Petition. The same is dismissed summarily.

¶21

(K.K. TATED, J.)

¶22

3 wp3218-11

The Regional Provident Fund Commissioner v. Sawant Food Products Ltd.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

The Regional Provident Fund Commissioner v. Sawant Food Products Ltd.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Raje Sambhaji Shikshan and Krida Prasarak Mandal Vs the State of Maharashtra and Ors.

Raje Sambhaji Shikshan and Krida Prasarak Mandal Vs the State of Maharashtra and Ors.

Mohmad Iqbal and Ors. Vs Patel Engineering Works and Ors.

Marathi Mission and Ors. Vs the State of Maharashtra and Ors.

Marathi Mission and Ors. Vs the State of Maharashtra and Ors.

Rajshree N Ghag Vs Mahanagar Telephone Nigam Ltd., and Anr.