Dismissed

K.Rajagopal, v. Assistant Provident Fund

Madras HC4 Oct 2024WP(MD)/18623/2016

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Madurai Bench of the Madras High Court dismissed the petitioner's writ petition seeking mandamus to defer EPF proceedings initiated under Section 7-A. The court held that deferring statutory proceedings via writ petition is not maintainable and noted the underlying Supreme Court civil appeal was already decided in 2019.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner's request to defer proceedings under Section 7-A of the EPF Act via writ petition was dismissed.

K.Rajagopal, Vs Assistant Provident Fund — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Madras HC (2024)

¶1

W.P(MD)No.18623 of 2016

¶2

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT

¶3

DATED: 04.10.2024

¶4

CORAM :

¶5

THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE B.PUGALENDHI

¶6

W.P(MD)No.18623 of 2016 and W.M.P.(MD)No.13477 of 2016

¶7

K.Rajagobal ... Petitioner

¶8

¶9

The Assistant Provident Fund Commissioner, Employees' Provident Fund Organisation, Regional Office, Lady Doak College Road, Madurai - 625 002.

¶10

... Respondent

¶11

PRAYER: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying this Court to issue a Writ of Mandamus directing the respondent to defer further proceedings in the proceedings No. M7/MD/MDU/41522-G/ENF-C/2015 dated 20.08.2015 till the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme court on the similar issue.

¶12

For Petitioner : Mrs.P.Malini

¶13

For Respondent : Mr.P.Karthick Standing Counsel

¶14

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

¶15

1/4

¶16

W.P(MD)No.18623 of 2016

¶17

O R D E R

¶18

This writ petition is filed by a contractor of TAFE Limited at Kalladipatti which is situated at Kalladipatti, Madurai, seeking Mandamus as against the respondent to defer the proceedings No. M7/MD/MDU/41522-G/ENF-C/2015, dated 20.08.2015.

¶19

2.The Assistant Provident Fund Commissioner has initiated a proceedings under Section 7-A of the EPF Act based on the report placed on him by the Enforcement Wing. The proceedings sought to be deferred is a show cause notice issued under Section 7-A of the EPF Act, calling upon the petitioner to pay his liability towards the EPF contribution.

¶20

3.The case of the petitioner is that he has participated in the enquiry and sought for an adjournment by referring the proceedings, which is pending before the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Civil Appeal No. 6221 of 2011. However, the respondent did not provide the adjournment and therefore this writ petition was filed.

¶21

2/4

¶22

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

¶23

W.P(MD)No.18623 of 2016

¶24

4.This petition is filed as against the statutory proceedings contemplated by the respondent. In the event if the petitioner intent to challenge the proceedings he has to do so in the manner known to law, this petition seeking Mandamus to defer a statutory proceedings is not maintainable. Moreover, the main contention of the petitioner is that the issue was pending before the Hon'ble Supreme Court in civil Appeal No. 6221 of 2011 and therefore, pending the civil appeal, he has requested for an adjournment. It is reported that the above civil appeal has already been decided by the Hon'ble Supreme Court on 28.02.2019.

¶25

5.In view of the same, this writ petition is dismissed. No costs. Consequently, the connected miscellaneous petition is closed.

¶26

04.10.2024 Internet :Yes Index :Yes/No NCC :Yes/No LR

¶27

¶28

The Assistant Provident Fund Commissioner, Employees' Provident Fund Organisation, Regional Office, Lady Doak College Road, Madurai - 625 002.

¶29

3/4

¶30

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

¶31

W.P(MD)No.18623 of 2016

¶32

B.PUGALENDHI, J.

¶33

¶34

W.P(MD)No.18623 of 2016

¶35

04.10.2024

¶36

4/4 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

K.Rajagopal, v. Assistant Provident Fund

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

K.Rajagopal, v. Assistant 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

Rajeswari Vs Soloman Bruce

Lakshmi Vs The Branch Manager

M/S Good Shepherd Schools, Vs the Presiding Officer

P.Kannusamy Vs Assistant Povident Fund

M.Arulprakasam, S/O.Micheal Vs Assistant Providen Fund

P.Govindaraj Vs Assistant Povident Fund