Dismissed

M/s.Diamond Engineering v. The Regional Providnet Fund

Madras HC5 Apr 2017WP/37517/2016

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This writ petition seeking delay in Provident Fund contribution. Per the adjudicating authority, the petitioner had failed to adhere to payment deadlines despite partial interim discharge. The dismissal was upheld; however, the petitioners were granted permission to settle the residual balance via equated monthly installments. The writ petition was disposed without costs.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner directed to pay the remaining amount in 12 monthly installments starting from May 2017.

M/s.Diamond Engineering Vs The Regional… — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Madras HC (2017)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶2

DATED: 05.04.2017

¶3

CORAM

¶4

THE HON'BLE Mr.JUSTICE M.M.SUNDRESH

¶5

& W.M.P.Nos.32145 &32146 of 2016 & WMP No.580 of 2017

¶6

M/s Diamond Engineering (Chennai) Pvt. Ltd., represented by its Deputy Managing Director P.Dhanaraj, NO.501, Vandalur,

¶7

Kelambakkam Main Road, Chennai-600 127.

¶8

.... Petitioner

¶9

Vs.

¶10

The Regional Provident Fund Commissioner-1,

¶11

Employees Provident Fund Organization, Regional Office, No.37, Royapettah High Road, Chennai-600 104. .... Respondent

¶12

Writ petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for issuance of a Writ of mandamus directing the respondent to consider the petitioner's representation dated 03.10.2016 seeking for payment of the contributions to the provident fund in installments.

¶13

For Petitioner : Mr.J.Pothiraj

¶14

For Respondent : Mr.K.Gunasekar

¶15

ORDER

¶16

The petitioner, in pursuant to its failure to pay the Provident Fund mandated under the Employees' Provident Funds and Miscellaneous Provisions Act, 1952, has come forward to file this writ petition to consider his representation dated 03.10.2016, by which, he made a request for deferment of the payment up to 31.03.2017.

¶17

Now, admittedly, the said period is also over. By way of an interim order, the petitioner has paid a sum of Rs.20,00,000/(Rupees twenty lakhs only).

¶18

https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

¶19

The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would submit that the financial condition of the petitioner is still worse.

¶20

Considering the said submission, the petitioner is directed to pay the remaining amount in 12 monthly instalments on or before 7th of every month starting from May, 2017. It is made clear that if the petitioner fails to pay even single instalment, it is well open to the respondent to proceed in accordance with law.

¶21

5.The writ petition stands disposed of accordingly. No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petitions are closed.

¶22

-s/d-
Assistant Registrar
True Copy
Sub-Assistant Registrar
raa
To
The Regional Provident Fund Commissioner-1,
Employees Provident Fund Organization,
Regional Office, No.37, Royapettah High Road,
Chennai-600 014.
+1 CC to Mr.J.Pothiraj, Advocate Sr.No.20522
+1 CC to Mr.K.Gunasekar, Advocate Sr.No.20499

¶23

W.P.No.37517 of 2016

¶24

NRJK(CO) KP(19/04/2017)

¶25

https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

M/s.Diamond Engineering v. The Regional Providnet Fund

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

M/s.Diamond Engineering v. The Regional Providnet Fund

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

S.Kamalasaraswathi, Vs The Chairman-cum-Managing

The Management of Doosan Vs The Presiding Officer

M.Veerasamy, Vs Union of India

United Labour Federation Vs The Government of Tamil Nadu

T.Marimuthu, Vs The District Collector

K.Kuppusamy Vs The Chairman