Petitioner filed a contempt petition alleging willful violation of a court order dated 22.12.2012 by respondents regarding Employees Provident Fund interest. The HighCourt held that since interest had already been paid, no case for contempt proceeded and dismissed the application.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Miscellaneous Jurisdiction Case No.3692 of 2017 In
Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.20387 of 2012
======================================================
Brij Bihari Singh son of Late Rameshwar Prasad Singh, resident of 68-A, Patliputra Housing Colony, P.S. Patliputra, District- Patna.
... ... Petitioner
Versus
... ... Opposite Parties ====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Subhash Chandra Bose For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Raju Giri, Adv.
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ASHWANI KUMAR SINGH ORAL JUDGMENT Date : 04-09-2019
Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel appearing for the opposite parties.
Patna High Court MJC No.3692 of 2017 dt.04-09-2019 2/7
further interest accrued on Rs.91,133/- from 30.06.2011 till actual date of payment, i.e., 15.03.2017. The non-payment of interest accrued on Rs.91,133/- from 30.06.2011 to 15.03.2017 would clearly amount to violation of the order dated 22.12.2016 passed in CWJC No.20387 of 2012.
“10. I find substance in the arguments advanced by the learned counsel for the petitioner. There is no dispute regarding the date of payment of balance amount of Employees Provident Fund Account. As stated above, Rs.3,70,043.62/-was paid to the petitioner on 30th June, 20111 was made only upto 27th August, 2008.
Patna High Court MJC No.3692 of 2017 dt.04-09-2019 3/7
“17. (1) When the sum standing to the credit of a member in the fund becomes payable, if the administrators so direct, where the member has been dismissed from the employment of the Corporation for misconduct, fraud or gross negligence, or where he has resigned such employment within five years of the commencement thereof, payment of the whole or any part of the Corporation’s contributions and interest accrued on such contributions credited to the individual account of the member from such sum may be withheld and the amount so withheld shall lapse to the fund.
(2) Where the member has been dismissed from employment or where he has resigned such employment in the circumstances specified in Clause (1) and the Administrators do not make a direction under that clause, thereby, if the Board of Director so directs, be deducted from the sum standing to the credit of the member in the fund in his individual account and paid to the Corporation the whole or any part of such contributions and interest.
Patna High Court MJC No.3692 of 2017 dt.04-09-2019
4/7
employment in the circumstances specified in clause (1) and the Administrators make a direction under that clause, there may, if the Board of Director so directs, be deducted from the sum standing to the credit of the member in the fund in his individual account and paid to the Corporation the whole or any part of such contributions and interest which have not lapsed to the fund under clause (1).
(4) When the sum standing to the credit of a member in the fund becomes payable there may, if the Board of Directors so directs, be deducted therefrom and paid to the Corporation any amount due under a liability incurred by the member to the Corporation, but not exceeding in any case the total amount of such contributions and interest which has not lapsed to the fund under clause (1) and which has not been deducted under clause (2) and (3).
(5) The Administrators shall be the sole judges of the sufficiency of the reason or reasons for withholding payment under clause (1) and the Board of Directors shall be sole judges for making an order of deduction under clauses (2), (3) and (4).
Patna High Court MJC No.3692 of 2017 dt.04-09-2019 5/7
Patna High Court MJC No.3692 of 2017 dt.04-09-2019 6/7
petitioner for different financial year has been narrated. The same is as under :-
| Amount (Rs.) |
Date from |
To | Days | Interest rate |
Compounding interest |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 370043.62 | 28.08.2008 | 31.03.2009 | 216 | 9.200% | 20146 |
| 390189.62 | 01.04.2009 | 31.03.2010 | 365 | 7.95% | 31020 |
| 421209.62 | 01.04.2010 | 31.03.2011 | 365 | 6.98% | 29379 |
| 450588.62 | 01.04.2011 | 30.06.2011 | 90 | 9.53% | 10588 91133 |
Patna High Court MJC No.3692 of 2017 dt.04-09-2019 7/7
(Ashwani Kumar Singh, J)
Pradeep/-
| AFR/NAFR | NAFR |
|---|---|
| CAV DATE | N.A. |
| Uploading Date | 09-09-2019 |
| Transmission Date |
2 issues framed by the court
Whether a case for initiation of contempt proceedings is made out when interest has been partially paid to the petitioner.
Whether the opposite parties have willfully violated the previous court order regarding payment of EPF interest.
Brij Bihari Singh
Bihar State Financial Corporation
Sri Pradip Kumar
Dy. Manager (EPF)
Ashwani Kumar Singh
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
