Partly allowed

M/S.Sreenidhi Towers Private Limited v. the Assistant Provident Fund Commissioner

Kerala HC12 Feb 2020WP(C)/27966/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court held that a writ petition is premature against a notice to show cause under Section 14B of the EPF Act. No penal order has been passed. The petitioner was directed to appear before the respondent within two weeks to furnish a statement and evidence for consideration of appropriate orders.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner directed to appear before the 1st respondent within two weeks to furnish statement and documentary evidence.

M/S.Sreenidhi Towers Private Limited Vs the… — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Kerala HC (2020)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJA VIJAYARAGHAVAN V

¶4

WEDNESDAY, THE 12TH DAY OF FEBRUARY 2020 / 23RD MAGHA, 1941

¶5

WP(C).No.27966 OF 2019(U)

¶6

PETITIONER:

¶7

M/S.SREENIDHI TOWERS PRIVATE LIMITED, EAST NADA, GURUVAYOOR, THRISSUR - 680 101, REPRESENTED BY ITS CHAIRMAN, SHRI. K.M. MOHANDAS, S/O. KALIKANDAN MAMU, AGED 68 YEARS

¶8

BY ADVS. SRI.K.P.DANDAPANI (SR.) SRI.MILLU DANDAPANI

¶9

RESPONDENTS:

¶10

1 THE ASSISTANT PROVIDENT FUND COMMISSIONER, OFFICE OF THE EMPLOYEES PROVIDENT FUND ORGANISATION, REGIONAL OFFICE, ERNAKULAM, KOCHI - 682 017 2 GOVERNMENT OF INDIA, REP. BY SECRETARY, MINISTRY OF LABOUR AND EMPLOYMENT, SHRAM SAKTHI BHAWAN, RAFI MARG, NEW DELHI - 110 001 R1 BY ADV. SRI.THOMAS MATHEW NELLIMOOTTIL R2 BY ADV. SHRI.P.VIJAYAKUMAR, ASG OF INDIA

¶11

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 12.02.2020, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶12

WP(C).No.27966 OF 2019(U)

¶13

¶14

JUDGMENT

¶15

Under challenge in this petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India is Ext.P8 notice issued to the petitioner requiring them to show cause with documentary evidence as to why penal damages under Section 14B of the Employees' Provident Funds and miscellaneous Provisions Act, 1952 (‘EPF Act’ for short) and interest under Section 7Q of the Act for belated remittances are not to be levied.

¶16

Heard Sri.Millu Dandapani, the learned counsel appearing for

¶17

the petitioner and Sri.Thomas Mathew Nellimootil, the learned standing counsel appearing for the 1^st respondent.

¶18

Having considered the submissions, I am of the considered opinion that the Writ Petition is premature. No adverse order has been passed against the petitioner and what is challenged is a mere notice asking them to appear and show cause as to why penal damages and interest are not to be imposed. The first proviso to Section 14B mandates that before levying and recovering such damages, the employer shall be afforded an opportunity of being heard. Instead of availing the said opportunity, the petitioner has rushed to this court.

¶19

WP(C).No.27966 OF 2019(U)

¶20

¶21

Having regard to the facts and circumstances, I direct the petitioner to appear before the 1^st respondent within a period of two weeks from today and furnish his statement. The petitioner may also produce documentary evidence if any. The 1^st respondent shall consider the same and pass appropriate orders in accordance with law.

¶22

This writ petition is disposed of as above.

¶23

Sd/- RAJA VIJAYARAGHAVAN V., J JUDGE

¶24

¶25

WP(C).No.27966 OF 2019(U)

¶26

¶27

APPENDIX

¶28

PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS:

¶29

EXHIBIT	P1 TRUE COPY OF THE DATED 08.12.2011	INSPECTION REPORT
EXHIBIT	P2 TRUE COPY OF THE NO.KR/KC19185/ENF 02.03.2012 ISSUED	NOTICE II (6/2012) DATED BY 1ST RESPONDENT
EXHIBIT	P3 TRUE COPY OF THE PETITIONER DATED	OBJECTION FILED BY THE 15.05.2012
EXHIBIT	P4 TRUE COPY OF THE ISSUED BY 1ST RES	ORDER DATED 11.06.2012 PONDENT
EXHIBIT	P5 TRUE COPY OF THE K1/1055/2013 DATE BY THE PETITIONER INTIMATING THE RE	LETTER NO. D 26.03.2013 SUBMITTED TO THE 1ST RESPONDENT MITTANCE OF PAYMENTS
EXHIBIT	P6 TRUE COPY OF NOTI NO.KR/KCH/0019185 DATED 13.03.2014	CE /000/ENF502/DAMAGES ISSUED BY R1
EXHIBIT	P7 TRUE COPY OF THE SUBMITTED BY THE	REPLY DATED 27.06.2014 PETITIONER
EXHIBIT	P8 TRUE COPY OF THE KR/KCH/19185/DAMA	NOTICE NO. GES/2019 DATED
	8.07.2019 ISSUED	BY 1ST RESPONDENT

¶30

SR //True Copy// PA to Judge

¶31

WP(C).No.27966 OF 2019(U) 5

M/S.Sreenidhi Towers Private Limited v. the Assistant Provident Fund Commissioner

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

M/S.Sreenidhi Towers Private Limited v. the Assistant Provident Fund Commissioner

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Santhosh K.A. Vs State of Kerala

Suresh U.M.. Vs the District Executive Officer

Forza Realtors Pvt. Ltd. Vs the District Labour Officer

Muhammed Asarudheen Vs State of Kerala

V.B.Asokan Vs Union of India

Visobh K.v., Vs State of Kerala