Disposed

M/s.Lotte India Corporation v. The Assistant Provident Fund

Madras HC8 Nov 2023WP/15847/2015

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court disposed of a writ petition challenging inspection proceedings under the EPF Act. Instead of quashing the show cause notice, the Court directed the respondent to consider and decide the issue in light of Supreme Court precedents regarding the definition of basic wage, after affording an opportunity to the petitioner.

What did the court decide?

The respondent is directed to consider and decide the issue in light of the decisions rendered by the Hon'ble Apex Court, after affording an opportunity to the petitioner.

M/s.Lotte India Corporation Vs The Assistant… — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Madras HC (2023)

¶1

Writ Petition No.15847 of 2023

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶3

DATED : 08.11.2023

¶4

CORAM

¶5

THE HONOURABLE DR.JUSTICE D.NAGARJUN

¶6

Writ Petition No.15847 of 2015 &

¶7

MP.No.1 of 2015

¶8

1.M/s.Lotte India Corporation Limited, 4/169, Rajiv Gandhi Salai(OMR), Kandanchavadi Bus Stop, Perungudi Taluk, Chennai-600 096, rep. by its Company Secretary, Mr.T.G.Karthikeyan.

¶9

..Petitioner

¶10

vs.

¶11

The Assistant Provident Fund Commissioner, Employees Provident Fund Organization, 37, Royapettah High Road, Chennai-600 014. ... Respondent

¶12

PRAYER : Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying to issue a Writ of Mandamus, forbearing the respondent from continuing the proceeding no.CC/CHN/345B/17/Enf/Regl/2015 dated 13.05.2015 and initiating any enquiry.

¶13

For Petitioner : Mr.Anand Gopalan for M/s.T.S.Gopalan & Co For Respondent : V.Sundareswaran, SPC

¶14

*****

¶15

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶16

1/4

¶17

Writ Petition No.15847 of 2023

¶18

O R D E R

¶19

This writ petition has been filed seeking for issuance of a Writ

¶20

of Mandamus forbearing the respondent from continuing the proceeding no.CC/CHN/345B/17/Enf/Regl/2015 dated 13.05.2015 and from initiating any enquiry.

¶21

2. The respondent has conducted the inspection of the petitioner establishment and pointed out certain irregularities and subsequently, vide order dated 13.05.2015, initiated proceedings under Section 7A of the Employees Provident Fund Act, 1952 (in short, 'the Act'.). Challenging the same, the petitioner has come forward with the present Writ Petition.

¶22

3. The learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that when the employees have agreed that the contribution to PF is payable only on basic salary, it is not permissible for the respondent to contend that the PF contribution should be paid on other elements of remuneration. However,

¶23

the learned counsel for the petitioner would fairly concede that the issue as

¶24

to whether the allowances that are being paid to the employees be part of

¶25

2/4

¶26

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶27

Writ Petition No.15847 of 2023

¶28

basic wage, for the purpose of contribution of provident fund, has been succinctly decided by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of “ Regional

¶29

Provident Fund Commissioner Vs. Vivekananda Vidyamandir and Others” reported in (2020) 17 SCC 643) and also in “Himachal Pradesh State Forest Corporation Vs. Regional Provident Fund Commissioner” reported in (2008) 5 SCC 756.

¶30

4. The learned Senior Panel counsel appearing for the respondent while referring to the above decisions, would submit that the issue involved in the Writ Petition has to be decided in the light of these decisions rendered by the Hon'ble Supreme Court and the matter may be remitted back to the respondent for consideration and no interference of the present impugned show cause notice is required.

¶31

5. Considering the submissions made by the learned counsel appearing for the parties and on going through the decisions rendered by the Hon'ble Apex Court referred to above, without interfering with the impugned show cause notice, this Court directs the respondent to consider and decide the issue in the light of the decisions rendered by the Hon'ble Apex Court referred to above, after affording an opportunity to the

¶32

3/4

¶33

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶34

Writ Petition No.15847 of 2023

¶35

petitioner and pass appropriate orders as expeditiously as possible.

¶36

Dr.D. NAGARJUN, J

¶37

¶38

6. The Writ Petition is disposed of with the above directions. No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed.

¶39

08.11.2023 Index : Yes/No Speaking order:Yes/No dn To The Assistant Provident Fund Commissioner, Employees Provident Fund Organization, 37, Royapettah High Road, Chennai-600 014.

¶40

Writ Petition No.15847 of 2015

¶41

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶42

4/4

M/s.Lotte India Corporation v. The Assistant Provident Fund

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

M/s.Lotte India Corporation v. The Assistant Provident Fund

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

T.Duraimanickam Vs The Director General of Police

S. Balasubramanian Vs The Director General of Police

S. Balasubramanian Vs The Director General of Police

C.Veerangan Vs The Commissioner of Municipal

M.Murugan Vs the Director of School

Er.R.Devarajan B.E., Vs Secretary to Government