Allowed

M/s. Schaeffier India Limited v. The Regional Provident Fund Commissioner - I

Madras HC20 Jan 2021WP/1186/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In this writ petition, the High Court issued a stay on the attachment of the petitioner's bank account initiated under Section 8F of the EPF Act. The Court directed the Respondents to refrain from coercive proceedings until the Appellate Tribunal disposes of pending waiver and stay petitions regarding an order under Section 7A of the same Act.

What did the court decide?

Stay on impugned order u/s. 8F EPF Act dated 12.01.2021; Appellate Tribunal to dispose of waiver and stay petitions expeditiously; Bank permitted to operate account.

M/s. Schaeffier India Limited Vs The Regional Provident… — Banking and Recovery | Madras HC (2021)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶2

DATED :20.01.2021

¶3

CORAM

¶4

THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE M.GOVINDARAJ

¶5

W.P.No.1186 of 2021

¶6

¶7

W.M.P.Nos.1334 and 1336 of 2021

¶8

M/s. Schaeffler India Limited Survey No.950, Rayakottah road Hosur, Tamilnadu-635109 Rep. By its Authorised Signatory ...Petitioner

¶9

Vs. 1.The Regional Provident Fund Commissioner-I Employees Provident Fund Organisation Regional Office Salem Steel Plant Road Dalavaipatti Salem-636 302

¶10

The Branch Manager ICICI Bank GSN Arcade Beside Vemalakalyana Mandapam Hosur, Krishnagiri-635 109 ...Respondents

¶11

Prayer:- Writ petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying to issue a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, calling for the records of the 1^st respondent in proceedings No. CB/RO-SLM/COMP-II/34933/K3/8F/2021 dated 12.01.2021, quash the same and forebear the 1^st respondent from initiating any recovery or coercive proceedings till hearing of the stay application by the Central Government Industrial Tribunal cum Labour Court, Chennai in EPFA.No.117 of 2020.

¶12

For Petitioner : Mr.Haroon

¶13

for M/s. T.S.Gopalan and co

¶14

For Respondents : Mr.R.Thirunavukkarasu, Standing counsel for R1

¶15

Aggrieved over the order passed u/s. 7A of the Employees' https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ Provident Funds and Miscellaneous Provisions Act, 1952

¶16

( hereinafter referred to as EPF & MP Act) dated 24.09.2020 passed by the 1^st respondent, the petitioner filed an appeal before the Central Government Industrial Tribunal, Chennai. The said appeal has been entertained and pending as EPFA.No.117 of 2020.

¶17

In the above said appeal, the petitioner has filed petitions to waive the condition of pre-deposit of the 75% amount demanded and a petition for stay. Both the petitions are pending before the Central Government Industrial Tribunal, Chennai without disposal.

¶18

During the pendency of these petitions, the 1^st respondent has issued an order u/s. 8F of the EPF and MP Act, 1952 on 12.01.2021 and the same is under challenge before this Court. According to the petitioner, the attachment of his bank account during the pendency of the petitions before the Appellate Tribunal is erroneous and illegal.

¶19

Mr.R.Thirunavukkarasu, learned standing counsel enters appearance on behalf of the first respondent.

¶20

Heard both sides.

¶21

Admittedly, an appeal challenging the validity of the order passed u/s. 7A of the EPF & MP Act is pending before the Appellate Tribunal. It is also true to state that the Appellate Tribunal has power to waive the pre-conditional deposit to be made by the appellant. Simultaneously, the Appelate Tribunal has power to grant stay of the order passed by the 1^st respondent. When the matter is seized of by the Appellate Tribunal, the action of the 1^st respondent ordering attachment of the bank account is not justified. However, considering the objects of the beneficial legislation and also the balance of convenience, the following order is passed:

¶22

(a) There shall be an order of stay of impugned proceedings issued u/s. 8F of the EPF & MP Act dated 12.01.2021 till the disposal of the waiver petition and stay petition pending before the Appellate Tribunal in EPFA.No.117 of 2020.

¶23

(b) The Appellate Tribunal is directed to dispose of the waiver petition and the stay petition filed by the petitioner as expeditiously as possible.

¶24

¶25

With the above directions, the writ petition is disposed of. No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petitions are closed.

Sd/-

Assistant Registrar

//True Copy//

Sub Assistant Registrar

¶30

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

¶31

¶32

The Central Government Industrial Tribunal cum Labour Court, Chennai

¶33

2.The Regional Provident Fund Commissioner-I Employees Provident Fund Organisation Regional Office Salem Steel Plant Road Dalavaipatti Salem-636 302

¶34

3.The Branch Manager
ICICI Bank
GSN Arcade
Beside Vemalakalyana Mandapam
Hosur, Krishnagiri-635 109
+1cc to Mr.T.S.Gopalan & CO, Advocate, S.R.No. 2686
W.P.No.1186 of 2021
NRL(CO)
GN(12/02/2021)

¶35

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

M/s. Schaeffier India Limited v. The Regional Provident Fund Commissioner - I

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

M/s. Schaeffier India Limited v. The Regional Provident Fund Commissioner - I

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

Dravida Thozilalar Uzhiyar Sangam, Vs The Deputy Chief Labour Commissioner (Central)

Renault Nissan Vs The Deputy Commissioner

M/s.Shasun Anna Paniyalar Sangam Vs Assistant Commissioner of Labour

M/s.Slb Logistics Pvt. Ltd. Vs The Asst. Provident Fund Commissioner (Compliance)

S.Thangadurai, S/o.Sellaiya Vs The Presiding Officer

M.Sathyamurthy Vs The Special Officer Administration