Dismissed

Homestead Projects and Developers Pvt.Ltd., v. the Assistant Provident Fund Commissioner

Kerala HC29 Nov 2022WP(C)/20444/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court dismissed the writ petition filed by a developer against the assessment of damages under Section 14B of the EPF Act. Upholding the pecuniary authority of the Assessing Authority and relying on a Supreme Court judgment, the Court held that a breach of obligation automatically triggers penal provisions and dismissed the petition while directing the deposit of the remaining balance.

What did the court decide?

The writ petition was dismissed; the balance amount of Rs. 42,000/- was directed to be deposited within one month.

Homestead Projects and Developers Pvt.Ltd… — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Kerala HC (2022)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE AMIT RAWAL

¶4

TUESDAY, THE 29TH DAY OF NOVEMBER 2022 / 8TH AGRAHAYANA, 1944

¶5

WP(C) NO. 20444 OF 2019

¶6

PETITIONER:

¶7

HOMESTEAD PROJECTS AND DEVELOPERS PVT.LTD.,
PKB TOWER, CHANGUVETTY,
KOTTAKKAL, MALAPPURAM-676501,
REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR K.ABDUL LATHEEF.

¶8

BY ADVS.
K.K.PREMALAL
SRI.VISHNU JYOTHIS LAL

¶9

RESPONDENTS:

¶10

1 THE ASSISTANT PROVIDENT FUND COMMISSIONER, EMPLOYEES PROVIDENT FUND ORGANIZATION, SUB REGIONAL OFFICE, ERANHIPALAM P.O., KOZHIKODE-673006.

¶11

2 THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL-CUM-LABOUR COURT ERNAKULAM 38/377,A-2, KARITHALA LANE, KARSHAKA ROAD, ERNAKULAM, COCHIN-682016.

¶12

BY ADVS.

¶13

ABRAHAM P.MEACHINKARA
Mr.M.A.SHAJI, CGC

¶14

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
29.11.2022, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶15

¶16

WP(C) NO. 20444 OF 2019

¶17

JUDGMENT

¶18

This writ petition has been filed against the order of Assessing Authority dated 04.12.2017 Ext.P4 assessing damages under Section 14B of the Employees Provident Fund and Miscellaneous Provisions Act, 1952 and order dated 03.06.2019 Ext.P6 of the Appellate Authority affirming the finding of the Assessing Authority. The amount of damages was assessed to tune of Rs.85,355/-. This Court vide order dated 26.07.2019 while admitting the writ petition granted interim stay, directing the petitioner to deposit 50% of the amount which is stated to have been deposited. The ground of assailment is that the petitioner was never in default. This cannot be a ground, which cannot be accepted in view of the judgment of the Supreme Court in Horticulture Experiment Station Gonikoppal, coorg v. The Regional Provident Fund Organization [2022 LiveLaw SC 202, Civil Appeal No.2136 of 2012] where it has been categorically held that once there is a breach of the obligation the penal provisions will automatically come into play. Section 14B is a penal provision envisaging damages to be imposed upon the defaulter. Since the

¶19

WP(C) NO. 20444 OF 2019

¶20

¶21

amount of damages is too paltry, I do not intend to defer with the findings of the Assessing Authority as well as the Appellate Authority. For the reason aforementioned, the writ petition is sans merit accordingly dismissed. The balance amount of Rs.42,000/- is directed to be deposited within a period of one month.

Sd/AMIT RAWAL

JUDGE

nak

WP(C) NO. 20444 OF 2019

¶26

¶27

¶28

PETITIONER EXHIBITS

¶29

EXHIBIT P1THE TRUE COPY OF THE PF CODE ALLOTMENT
LETTER DATED 24.07.2017.

¶30

EXHIBIT P2THE TRUE COPY OF THE NOTICE DATED
13.11.2017.

¶31

EXHIBIT P3THE TRUE COPY OF THE REPLY DATED
24.11.2017 BY THE PETITIONER.

¶32

EXHIBIT P4THE TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER OF THE FIRST
RESPONDENT DATED 4 DEC 2017.

¶33

EXHIBIT P5THE TRUE COPY OF THE APPEAL FILED BEFORE
THE SECOND RESPONDENT.
EXHIBIT P6THE TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER OF THE SECOND
RESPONDENT DATED 03.06.2019.

Homestead Projects and Developers Pvt.Ltd., v. the Assistant Provident Fund Commissioner

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Homestead Projects and Developers Pvt.Ltd., 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

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Asha Ramachandran Vs the District Collector

Nanu Gopi (Ex.Ina) Vs .Union of India Represented by the Secretary to Government Ministry of Defence, Department

Steel Industrials Kerala Ltd. Vs the Board of Trustees

Varthamanam Ventures (P) Ltd., Vs the Regional Provident Fund Commissioner

M/S. Trichur Urban Co-Operative Bank Ltd., Vs the Assistant P.F Commissioner

V.Narayanan Vs the Additional District Magistrate