Dismissed

Employees Prvident Fund Organization v. West Coast Petroleum Agency

Kerala HC5 Mar 2024WA/1722/2017

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

EPFO challenged a Tribunal remand order concerning EPF liability for a petroleum dealership taken over in 2003 from a defaulting prior establishment. The Single Bench upheld the remand; the Division Bench agreed that liability of the first respondent or the erstwhile agency had to be determined afresh and dismissed the appeal.

What the court decided

AI extract

Employees Prvident Fund Organization Vs West… — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Kerala HC (2024)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE AMIT RAWAL

¶4

¶5

THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE C.S. SUDHA

¶6

TUESDAY, THE 5^TH DAY OF MARCH 2024 / 15TH PHALGUNA, 1945

¶7

WA NO. 1722 OF 2017

¶8

AGAINST THE JUDGMENT DATED 29.05.2017 IN WPC NO.19156 OF 2012 OF HIGH COURT OF KERALA

¶9

APPELLANT/WRIT PETITIONER:

¶10

EMPLOYEES PROVIDENT FUND ORGANIZATION, SUB REGIONAL OFFICE, BHAVISHYANIDHI BHAVAN, ERANHIPALAM KOZHIKODE DISTRICT, KERALA REPRESENTED BY THE REGIONAL PROVIDENT FUND COMMISSIONER, KOZHIKODE.

¶11

BY ADVS. SRI.N.N.SUGUNAPALAN (SR.) SMT.T.N.GIRIJA SCEPF ORGANISATION

¶12

RESPONDENTS/RESPONDENTS:

¶13

1 WEST COAST PETROLEUM AGENCY, REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGING PARTNER, MR. P.K. KOYAKKUTTY, ADHOC DEALER FOR HPCL, CHELMBRA, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT, KERALA-676 505.

¶14

2 HINDUSTAN PETROLEUM CO. LTD., POST BOX NO. 1601, TATAPURAM P.O., ERNAKULAM-682 018, RPERESENTED BY ITS SENIOR REGIONAL MANAGER.

¶15

3 EMPLOYEES PROVIDENT FUND APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, REPRESENTED BY ITS REGISTRAR, SCOPE MINAR, 4TH FLOOR, CORE-2, LAXMI NAGAR, NEW DELHI-110 092.

¶16

THIS WRIT APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 05.03.2024,

¶17

THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶18

Writ Appeal No.1722 of 2017

¶19

¶20

AMIT RAWAL & C.S.SUDHA, JJ.

¶21

-----------------------------------------------Writ Appeal No.1722 of 2017

¶22

------------------------------------------------Dated this the 05^th day of March, 2024

¶23

J U D G M E N T

¶24

Amit Rawal, J.

¶25

Order of remand of the Tribunal in an appeal preferred by the establishment, taken over from 2003 onwards, was challenged by the appellant/Employees Provident Fund Organization under Article 226 of the Constitution of India on the premise that the previous establishment namely M/s.Hindustan Auto Care Centre, Chelembra a contractor of the Hindustan Petroleum Co. Ltd. had been in default of contribution being registered and allotted code number KR/KK.17677 effective from 14/09/2000. Respondent No.1 establishment taken up the plea that they have taken over with effect from 01/04/2003 in view of the agreement entered into with the Hindustan Petroleum Co. Ltd. and therefore were not liable. It is in that background Appellate Tribunal found that it would be expedient and conducive for re-determination of the liability as to whether the first respondent would be covered under the provisions of the Act having more than 20 employees or not.

¶26

Writ Appeal No.1722 of 2017

¶27

¶28

Learned Single Bench upheld the findings of the Tribunal

¶29

by holding that even if the ownership of the subject dealership belongs to the HPCL, the EPF authorities can proceed against the excess of HPCL available with the dealer but cannot pass on the liability under Section 17B in the absence of any continuous liability. Similar is the argument of the appellant before us in the intra court appeal which was not accepted by the learned Single Bench.

¶30

We are of the view that the said argument do not have any legs to stand or basis to accept for, the Tribunal rightly remanded the matter to the authorities to determine the liability of either the first respondent or of the erstwhile agency, in accordance with law.

¶31

There is no illegality in the order of the single Bench. Appeal stands dismissed.

¶32

SD/AMIT RAWAL JUDGE

¶33

SD/-

¶34

C.S.SUDHA JUDGE

¶35

Employees Prvident Fund Organization v. West Coast Petroleum Agency

Case brief

What is this about?

What the court decided

Employees Prvident Fund Organization v. West Coast Petroleum Agency

Case brief

What is this about?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Radha Krishna Bhatta Vs T.Madhava Bhatta

The Zamorin Raja of Calicut Vs * v. Haridas

Samoothiri Raja Kozhikode Vs v.M.Karunakaran

The Corporate Manager Vs Sobhin George

Export Inspection Council of India Vs K S Jeejimol

Sobhin George Vs the State of Kerala