Disposed¶22

M/s. J J College of Engg. Technology v. The Regional Provident Fund Commissioner,I

Madras HC30 Oct 2025WP(MD)/6248/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

EPF & MP Act 1952; Section 14B damages recovery; Section 8F recovery completed; conditional interim/stay order by Appellate Tribunal upheld; certiorarified mandamus refused; writ disposed with remedy left to appellate Tribunal; time-bound direction to decide EPFA.No.85/2021 within six months; follows WP.(MD)No.4869 of 2022 dated 17.10.2024; Madurai Bench; Justice B.Pugalendhi; JJ College of Engineering Technology v Regional Provident Fund Commissioner-I, Trichy.

What did the court decide?

Writ petition disposed of; petitioner directed to work out its remedy before the appellate Tribunal; appellate Tribunal directed to conclude the appeal in EPFA.No.85/2021 preferably within six months from receipt of a copy of the order; no costs; connected miscellaneous petitions closed. ¶22

M/s. J J College of Engg. Technology Vs The Regional… — Writ and Judicial Review | Madras HC (2025)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶22

Issue for consideration

Whether the conditional interim order dated 22.09.2021 passed by the appellate Tribunal (CGIT cum Labour Court, Chennai) in EPFA.No.85/2021 should be quashed by a writ of certiorarified mandamus. +2 more

¶10

Court's answer

In view of the issue already decided by this Court and the fact that the Section 14B damages amount with interest had already been recovered under Section 8F of the Act, the writ petition was disposed of with a direction to the petitioner to work out its remedy before the appellate Tribunal.

¶22

Ratio / Principle

Following its earlier order in WP.(MD)No.4869 of 2022 dated 17.10.2024, this Court proceeded on the footing that the appellate authority is entitled to impose any condition while entertaining the application for stay; accordingly, the challenge to the conditional interim order failed.

¶22

Key takeaways

A direction was issued to the appellate Tribunal to conclude the appeal in EPFA.No.85/2021 as expeditiously as possible, preferably within six months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.ratio¶22

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Madras High Court (Madurai Bench), by B.Pugalendhi J., disposed of a management writ petition under Article 226 challenging the conditional interim order dated 22.09.2021 passed by the CGIT-cum-Labour Court, Chennai (Appellate Tribunal) in EPFA.No.85/2021 under the Employees' Provident Funds and Miscellaneous Provisions Act, 1952. Relying on its earlier order in WP.(MD)No.4869 of 2022 dated 17.10.2024, the Court proceeded on the basis that the appellate authority is entitled to impose conditions while entertaining a stay application. Noting that the entire Section 14B damages together with interest had already been collected from the petitioner and recovered under Section 8F of the Act, the Court disposed of the petition with a direction to the petitioner to work out its remedies before the appellate Tribunal, and directed the Tribunal to conclude the appeal preferably within six months. No costs; connected miscellaneous petitions closed.

¶1

WP.(MD)No.6248 of 2022

¶2

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT

¶3

DATED : 30.10.2025

¶4

CORAM :

¶5

THE HON`BLE MR.JUSTICE B.PUGALENDHI

¶6

WP.(MD)No.6248 of 2022 and WMP.(MD)Nos.4853 of 2022 & 4347 of 2024

¶7

M/s.JJ. College of Engg.Technology Poolankulathupatti Trichy-620 009 Through its Chairman ... Petitioner

¶8

Vs.

¶9

The Regional Provident Fund Commissioner-I, Employees’ Provident Fund Organization, Regional Office, No.18, Sri Complex, Madurai Road, Trichy-625 008 ... Respondents

¶10

Prayer : Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying for the issuance of Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, to call for the records from the file of the CGIT cum Labour Court, Chennai herein EPFA.No.85/2021 and to quash the interim order dated 22.09.2021 and also direct the respondent not to take coercive steps when an appeal had been admitted by the Appellate Tribunal.

¶11

1/4

¶12

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

¶13

WP.(MD)No.6248 of 2022

¶14

For Petitioner : Mr.C.Karthikeyan For Respondent : Mr.I.Pinayagash

¶15

ORDER

¶16

The conditional interim order passed by the respondent

¶17

dated 22.09.2021 is under challenge in this writ petition.

¶18

2.This writ petition has been filed by the Management as against the conditional order passed by the appellate tribunal while granting an interim order. This Court, in WP.(MD)No.4869 of 2022 dated 17.10.2024, has already passed an order deciding this issue that the appellate authority is entitled to impose any condition while entertaining the application for stay. Moreover, in this case, it is reported that the entire amount pursuant to the damages under Section 14B of the Employees' Provident Funds and Miscellaneous Provisions Act, 1952 [hereinafter referred as ‘the Act’] together with interest was already collected from the petitioner. However, the same is subject to the proceedings which 2/4

¶19

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

¶20

WP.(MD)No.6248 of 2022

¶21

is now pending with the appellate Tribunal. The learned counsel on either side submits that in view of the pendency of this writ petition, the Tribunal has also not decided the issue so far.

¶22

3.Since the issue has already decided by this Court in WP. (MD)No.4869 of 2022 dated 17.10.2024 and also considering the fact that the amount was already recovered under Section 8F of the Act, this writ petition is disposed of with a direction to the petitioner to workout their remedy before the appellate Tribunal. The appellate Tribunal shall also conclude the appeal in EPFA.No. 85/2021, as expeditiously as possible, preferably, within a period of six months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petitions are closed.

¶23

30.10.2025

¶24

NCC : Yes/No Index : Yes/No gns

¶25

3/4

¶26

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

¶27

WP.(MD)No.6248 of 2022

¶28

B.PUGALENDHI,J