Disposed

M/s.Mosmetro India (P) Ltd, v. The Regional Provident Fund

Madras HC27 Feb 2020WP/17344/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court dismissed the writ petition challenging demands under Sections 7-A, 7-Q, and 14-B of the EPF Act. The court granted liberty to the petitioner to pursue a pending waiver application before the Central Government Industrial Tribunal regarding the Section 14-B demand without expressing a view on the merits.

What did the court decide?

Liberty granted to the petitioner to work out remedy before the Central Government Industrial Tribunal regarding pending application for waiver of damages under Section 14-B; no view expressed on meri

M/s.Mosmetro India (P) Ltd, Vs The Regional… — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Madras HC (2020)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶2

DATED: 27.02.2020

¶3

CORAM

¶4

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE K.RAVICHANDRABAABU

¶5

W.P.No.17344 of 2018

¶6

M/s.Mosmetro India (P) Ltd., Represented by its Power Agent and Authorized Signatory U.Vijay Metha No.88/150, Dharma towers II Floor, Office No.9, Nelson Manickam Road, Choolaimedu Chennai-600 094.

¶7

...Petitioner

¶8

vs.

¶9

The Regional Provident Fund Commissioner-I Regional Office Employees' Provident Fund Organisation 37, Royapettah High Road, Chennai-600 014. ...Respondent

¶10

Prayer: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying to issue a Writ of Certiorari, calling for the records in the order bearing No.TN/(85005)/D17/MAS/PDC/2017-2018 dated 29.05.2018 passed by the respondent under Section 14-B of the Employees' Provident Fund Act, culminated in TN/(85005)/D-17/MAS/PDC/2017 dated 29.05.2018 passed by the respondent under Section 7-Q of the Employees' Provident Fund Act and quash the same.

¶11

For Petitioner : Mr.U.Vijay Metha for M/s.V.Legal Empire

¶12

For Respondent : Mr.T.R.Sundaram

¶13

O R D E R

¶14

This writ petition is filed challenging the demand made under Sections 7-A, 7-Q and 14-B of the Employees' Provident Funds and Miscellaneous Provisions Act, 1952.

¶15

It is represented by the learned counsel for the petitioner that during the pendency of this writ petition, based on the affidavit of undertaking given by the petitioner, the petitioner has discharged their liability towards the demand made under Sections 7-A and 7-Q of the Employees' https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ Provident Funds and Miscellaneous Provisions Act, 1952. He

¶16

also submitted that insofar as the demand made under Section 14-B of the Employees' Provident Funds and Miscellaneous Provisions Act, 1952, is concerned, the petitioner has already approached the Central Government Industrial Tribunal seeking for waiver and the said proceedings are still pending before the concerned authority. Therefore, he submitted that based on the undertaking affidavit filed before this Court to the above effect, the petitioner may be given liberty to work out their remedy before the concerned authority, where their application for waiver against the demand made under Section 14-B is pending.

¶17

The learned counsel for the respondent is not disputing the above submissions made by the petitioner's counsel.

¶18

In view of the above stated facts and circumstances and without expressing any view on the merits of the claim made by the petitioner, this Writ Petition is disposed of, by granting liberty to the petitioner to work out their remedy before the concerned authority, where they have filed the application seeking for waiver of damages. No costs.

¶19

Sd/-

¶20

Assistant Registrar(CS-VIII)

¶21

//True copy//

¶22

Sub Assistant Registrar

¶23

¶24

¶25

The Regional Provident Fund Commissioner-I Regional Office Employees' Provident Fund Organisation 37, Royapettah High Road, Chennai-600 014.

¶26

+1cc to Mr.T.R.Sundaram, Advocate SR.No.17094

¶27

W.P.No.17344 of 2018

¶28

RSV(CO) GMY(18/03/2020)

¶29

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

M/s.Mosmetro India (P) Ltd, v. The Regional Provident Fund

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

M/s.Mosmetro India (P) Ltd, v. The Regional Provident Fund

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

Masilamani Vs The District Collector

The General Manager Vs The Deputy Chier Labour

Mr.C.Shakthivel Vs The Special Joint commissioner of Labour

S.Raja Vs S.Beo Thangadurai

Jayalakshmi, Vs The District Collector

S.Arokia Maniraj Vs The Public Information Officer Cum