Disposed

Smt.Laila Sasikumar, v. the Assistant Provident Fund Commissioner

Kerala HC14 Dec 2021WP(C)/28282/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Kerala permitted the petitioner to remit provident fund interest levied under Section 7Q via a writ petition in civil, directing payment in twelve monthly installments starting 10.01.2022.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner permitted to pay amounts due under Ext.P3 in twelve monthly installments starting 10.01.2022; respondent may recover entire dues on default of any installment.

Smt.Laila Sasikumar, Vs the Assistant… — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Kerala HC (2021)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE MURALI PURUSHOTHAMAN

¶4

TUESDAY, THE 14^TH DAY OF DECEMBER 2021/23RD AGRAHAYANA, 1943

¶5

WP(C) NO. 28282 OF 2021

¶6

PETITIONER:

¶7

SMT. LAILA SASIKUMAR, AGED 53 YEARS ANPAMATTATHIL HOUSE, VADAYAMPADY P. O., PUTHENCRUZ 682 308, FORMER MANAGING PARTNER, M/S. SAINO POLYNMERS PVT.LTD., VANDIPETTA, THIRUVANIYUR P. O., PUTHENCRUZ. BY ADVS. P.RAMAKRISHNAN PREETHI RAMAKRISHNAN (P-212) T.C.KRISHNA PRATAP ABRAHAM VARGHESE ASHA K.SHENOY C.ANIL KUMAR

¶8

RESPONDENT:

¶9

THE ASSISTANT PROVIDENT FUND COMMISSIONER, EMPLOYEES PROVIDENT FUND ORGANIZATION, REGIONAL OFFICE, BHAVISHYANIDHI BHAVAN, KALOOR, KOCHI - 682 017. SRI. SAJEEV KUMAR K. GOPAL, SC

¶10

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 14.12.2021, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶11

W.P(C) NO.28282 OF 2021

¶12

¶13

JUDGMENT

¶14

This writ petition is filed challenging Ext.P3 proceedings issued by the respondent under Section 7Q of the Employees Provident Fund and Miscellaneous Provisions Act, 1952, levying interest for belated payment of contribution during the period from 01.06.2009 to 31.03.2021.

¶15

When the writ petition came up for consideration today, the limited prayer of the petitioner is to permit the petitioner to remit the amounts due under Ext.P3 in easy installments.

¶16

I have heard the learned Standing Counsel for the respondent also.

¶17

According to the learned Standing Counsel for

¶18

the respondent, the installments shall be limited to six monthly installments.

¶19

W.P(C) NO.28282 OF 2021

¶20

¶21

The learned counsel for the petitioner submits

¶22

that, the petitioner has already sold the establishment and it will be difficult for him to pay the amount due under Ext.P3 in six installments.

¶23

In view of the facts and circumstances of the

¶24

case, I feel it just and proper to direct the petitioner to

¶25

pay the amounts covered by Ext.P3 in twelve monthly installments starting from 10.01.2022. In case, the petitioner fails to pay any of the installments as aforesaid, the respondent will be free to initiate appropriate steps for the recovery of the entire amounts due under Ext.P3.

¶26

With the above direction, the writ petition is disposed of.

¶27

Sd/-

¶28

MURALI PURUSHOTHAMAN JUDGE

¶29

SPR

¶30

W.P(C) NO.28282 OF 2021

¶31

¶32

APPENDIX

¶33

PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS:-

¶34

EXHIBIT P1 TRUE COPY OF SUMMONS DATED 08/06/2021 ISSUED BY THE RESPONDENT. EXHIBIT P2 TRUE COPY OF WRITTEN OBJECTION DATED 23/08/2021 SUBMITTED BY THE APPELLANT BEFORE THE RESPONDENT.

¶35

EXHIBIT P3 TRUE COPY OF ORDER DATED 02/11/2021 ISSUED BY THE RESPONDENT.

¶36

RESPONDENTS'S EXHIBITS: NIL.

Smt.Laila Sasikumar, v. the Assistant Provident Fund Commissioner

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Smt.Laila Sasikumar, 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

Iffco Tokio General Insurance Company Limited Vs Reji George

United India Insurance Company Limited Vs a.K.John

Muvattupuzha Rubber Marketing Vs Employees Provident Fund

The Secretary Vs Reji M.V.

Kesilda .J Vs the District Level Authorization Committee for Transplantation of Human Organs

Jameela Beevi Vs the Authorized Officer, Union Bank of India