Allowed

M/s.Goms Electrical Pvt. Ltd. v. Assistant Pf Commissioner (Compliance)

Madras HC20 Jul 2021WP/14975/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This writ petition prayed for a stay on recovery proceedings pending the hearing of an appeal. The court held that since the petitioner has an appeal remedy under Section 7(1) of the EPF Act, no coercive steps shall be taken until the Tribunal decides, relying on Pyramid Saimira Theatre Ltd.

What did the court decide?

Writ Petition disposed of forbidding the respondent from initiating recovery proceedings against the petitioner till the appeal is heard by the Industrial Tribunal cum EPF Appellate Tribunal.

M/s.Goms Electrical Pvt. Ltd. Vs Assistant Pf… — Banking and Recovery | Madras HC (2021)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶2

DATED: 20.07.2021

¶3

CORAM:

¶4

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE S.VAIDYANATHAN

¶5

W.P.No.14975 of 2021
 and
WMP.No.15859 of 2021

¶6

M/s.GOMS Electricals Pvt. Ltd,
Rep. by its Authorised Signatory-Thanigachalam. M
# 43, RK Nagar, First Main Road,
Mandaveli,
Chennai- 600 014.

¶7

... Petitioner

¶8

-vs-

¶9

Assistant Provident Fund Commissioner (Compliance),
Employees Provident Fund Organisation,
Regional Office,
No.37, Royapettah High Road,
Chennai-600 014.... Respondent

¶10

Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution
of India, praying for issuance of a Writ of Mandamus forbearing
the respondent from initiating recovery proceedings against the
petitioner in terms of its Order No.CHN-1/D/26/TN/40225/Enf/Reg
l/2021 dated 06.07.2021 till the appeal to be filed by the
petitioner is taken up for hearing by the Presiding Officer of
Central Government Industrial Tribunal cum EPF Appellate
Tribunal, Chennai.

¶11

For Respondent : Mr.R.Vishnu (R1)

¶12

The petitioner has come forward with this Writ Petition
forbearing the respondent from initiating recovery proceedings
against the petitioner in terms of its Order No.CHN-
1/D/26/TN/40225/Enf/Regl/2021 dated 06.07.2021 till the appeal to
be filed by the petitioner is taken up for hearing by the
Presiding Officer of Central Government Industrial Tribunal cum
EPF Appellate Tribunal, Chennai.

¶13

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

¶14

2. Mr.R.Vishnu, learned counsel takes notice for the
first respondent. By consent of both sides, this Writ Petition
is taken up for hearing and disposed of at the stage of admission
itself.

¶15

3. Admittedly, the petitioner has got an appeal remedy

¶16

under Section 7 (I) of the Employees Provident Fund Act, 1952. Rule 7(2) of the Employees Provident Fund Appellate Tribunal (Procedure) Rules1997 specifies the outer time limit to prefer an appeal within 120 days (60 days+60 days). Therefore, the petitioner is permitted to file an appeal, within the time stipulated and no coercive steps shall be taken against the petitioner till a decision is taken by the Tribunal in the stay/waiver petition with Appeal that may be filed by the petitioner, in the light of the judgment of this Court in the case of Pyramid Saimira Theatre Ltd., vs. Regional Provident Fund Commissioner, Employees Provident Fund Organisation and Others [W.P. Nos. 1, 2 and 14591 of 2009] decided on 29.07.2009 . If no appeal is filed within the time limit, EPFO can proceed with coercive action.

¶17

4. Accordingly, this Writ Petition is disposed of. No
costs. Consequently, connected Miscellaneous Petition is closed.

¶18

 Sd/-

¶19

 Assistant Registrar(CS-VI)

¶20

//True Copy//

¶21

 Sub Assistant Registrar

¶22

arr

¶23

To

¶24

The Assistant Provident Fund Commissioner (Comp),
Employees Provident Fund Organisation,
(Ministry of Labour and Employment, Govt. of India)
Regional Office, Bhavishya Nidhi Bhawan,
No.37, Royapettah High Court,
Chennai-600 014.

¶25

W.P.No.14975 of 2021

¶26

NMI(CO)
SB(27/08/2021)

¶27

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

M/s.Goms Electrical Pvt. Ltd. v. Assistant Pf Commissioner (Compliance)

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

M/s.Goms Electrical Pvt. Ltd. v. Assistant Pf Commissioner (Compliance)

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

K. Arumugam Vs the Presiding Officer

V. Mahesh Vs the Presiding Officer

J. Rajasekar Vs the Presiding Officer

M/s.Goms Integrated Facility Management Vs Assistant Provident Fund Commissioner

The Secretary Vs Appellate Authority

Sodex Vs the Deputy Commissioner of