Dismissed

Steel Industrials Kerala Ltd. v. the Board of Trustees

Kerala HC28 Nov 2022WP(C)/29131/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Steel Industries Kerala Ltd challenged an assessing authority's order and Tribal's appellate order under Section 14B of the Employees Provident Funds and Miscellaneous Provisions Act, 1952 regarding damages for non-payment of contributions. The Court dismissed the writ petition, holding the orders legal and justified as the petitioner failed to prove the date of sick unit declaration or revival ef

What did the court decide?

Writ Petition dismissed; no interference with the assessing authority's order of Rs.47,150/- or the Tribunal's appellate order limiting it to 70%.

Steel Industrials Kerala Ltd. Vs the Board of… — 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

MONDAY, THE 28^TH DAY OF NOVEMBER 2022 / 7TH AGRAHAYANA, 1944

¶5

WP(C) NO. 29131 OF 2022

¶6

PETITIONER:

¶7

STEEL INDUSTRIALS KERALA LTD. GENERAL ENGINEERING WORKS, P.B.NO.6, THURAVOOR, ALLEPPEY - 688 532 REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR.

¶8

BY ADVS. LATHA ANAND M.N.RADHAKRISHNA MENON K.R.PRAMOTH KUMAR S.VISHNU (ARIKKATTIL) SIDHARTH P.S. RADHAKRISHNA PILLAI B GOVIND P.

¶9

RESPONDENTS:

¶10

1 THE BOARD OF TRUSTEES EMPLOYEES PROVIDENT FUND ORGANIZATION, BHAVISHYANIDHI BHAVAN, BHIKAIJI CAMA PLACE, NEW DELHI - 110 066 REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY.

¶11

2 ASSISTANT PROVIDENT FUND COMMISSIONER EMPLOYEES PROVIDENT FUND ORGANISATION SUB REGIONAL OFFICE, KALOOR, KOCHI - 682 017. 3 THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL CUM LABOUR COURT 8TH FLOOR, HOUSING BOARD BUILDING, PANAMPILLY NAGAR, ERNAKULAM - 682 036.

¶12

BY ADV SRI.SAJEEV KUMAR K. GOPAL, SC, EPFO

¶13

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 28.11.2022, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

WP(C) No.29131/2022

JUDGMENT

Ext.P1 order of the assessing authority dated 13.10.2015 assessing the damages under Section 14B of the Employees Provident Funds and Miscellaneous Provisions Act, 1952 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act') to the tune of Rs.47,150/- and Ext.P4 appellate order of the Tribunal dated 14.03.2022 limitting the damages to the extent of 70% are under challenge before this Court.

¶18

Petitioner being an establishment was allotted a code under the provisions of the Act which is the stated to be a Government Company under Section 617 of the erstwhile Companies Act. On account of non payment of the EPF contribution while making the wages of the employees, proceedings under Section 14B of the Act for the period February 2014 to October 2014 was initiated. Contention of the petitioner was that the Company was registered under the Sick Industrial Companies (Special Provisions) Act, 1985 (SICA), the erstwhile Act and therefore, other proceedings could not have been initiated. The aforementioned contention was rejected by the assessing authority while assessing the damages.

¶19

WP(C) No.29131/2022

¶20

¶21

Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that once

¶22

the Company had been declared as sick, they are not liable to pay the damages as it was revived by the Government only in 2015, in respect of the amount pertaining to the period when the Company was sick.

¶23

On the other hand, learned counsel for the respondents submitted that the order under challenge are perfectly legal and justified for the reason that no order of declaration of the Company as sick. All proceedings stood abated if the party fails to seek a reference within a period of six months under the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016. It is very paltry amount as the Company is now running and therefore cannot take the excuse of non payment.

¶24

I have heard the counsel for the parties and appraised the paper book.

¶25

I am of the view that the orders under challenge are perfectly legal and justified and would not call for any interference particularly when the petitioner Company failed to place on record

¶26

the date of declaration of the unit as sick and effective date of revival . The period of damages is February 2014 to October 2014 i.e., for eight months. The amount of Rs.47,150/- had already

¶27

WP(C) No.29131/2022

¶28

¶29

been reduced to 70%. No interference is warranted under Article

¶30

226 of the Constitution of India.

¶31

Writ Petition is dismissed.

¶32

Sd/AMIT RAWAL JUDGE

csl

WP(C) No.29131/2022

APPENDIX OF WP(C) 29131/2022

¶37

PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS

¶38

Exhibit P1 TRUE COPY OF ORDER NO.KR/KCH/1200/DAMAGES CELL/2015/1116 DATED 13.10.2015. Exhibit P2 TRUE COPY OF THE MEMORANDUM OF APPEAL FILED BEFORE THE 3RD RESPONDENT TRIBUNAL. Exhibit P3 TRUE COPY OF THE REPLY TO THE APPEAL NO.83 OF 2021. Exhibit P4 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER OF THE APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DATED 14/03/2022 IN APPEAL NO.83/2021. Exhibit P5 TRUE COPY OF THE COMMON JUDGMENT DATED 18/12/2020 IN WP(C) NO.14930/2020 AND 14962/2020. Exhibit P6 TRUE COPY OF ORDER DATED 13/10/2021 IN THE REVIEW PETITION NO.658/2021 AND 659/2021.

¶39

RESPONDENTS' EXHIBITS

¶40

Exhibit R1 (a) TRUE COPY OF THE RECORDINGS OF THE DAILY PROCEEDING HELD ON 13/10/2015 OF THE INQUIRY AUTHORITY

Steel Industrials Kerala Ltd. v. the Board of Trustees

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Steel Industrials Kerala Ltd. v. the Board of Trustees

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

The Kerala Automobile Dealers Association Vs State of Kerala

Thomas P Mathew Vs District Collector

B.Sudheerkumar Vs the Regional Joint Labour Commissioner, Kollam

Asha Ramachandran Vs the District Collector

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

Central Travancore Specialists Hospitals Ltd. Vs the Regional Provident Fund Commissioner