AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
S.P. Mehrotra, J.—The present Writ Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India has been filed, inter-alia, praying for quashing the order dated 6th August, 1996 (Annexure 4 to the Writ Petition) and the notice dated 14th August, 2008 (Annexure 1 to the Writ Petition).
It appears that an order dated 6th August, 1996 was passed u/s 7-A of the Employees'' Provident Funds and Miscellaneous Provisions Act, 1952 determining an amount of Rs. 14,336-60 as due from the petitioner under the said Act.
The said notice dated 14th August, 2008 (Anneuxre 1 to the Writ Petition) has been issued for recovery of an amount of Rs. 14,337/- as determined by the said order dated 6th August, 1996 alongwith interest u/s 7Q of the Employees'' Provident Funds and Miscellaneous Provisions Act, 1952.
Heard Sri N.C. Gupta, learned Counsel for the petitioner and Sri Amit Negi, learned Counsel appearing for respondent Nos. 2 and 3.
It is submitted by Sri N.C. Gupta, learned Counsel for the petitioner that as the order dated 6th August, 1996 (Annexure 4 to the Writ Petition) was passed ex-parte, an Application supported by an Affidavit has been filed before the Regional Provident Fund Commissioner, Varanasi for recall of the said order dated 6th August, 1996. Copy of the said Recall Application alongwith its supporting Affidavit has been filed as Annexure 2 to the Writ Petition.
In reply, Sri Amit Negi submits that the petitioner has two remedies open to him, namely, 1- filing an application for review u/s 7-B of the aforesaid Act, and 2- filing an Appeal u/s 7-I of the aforesaid Act.
Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case and having considered the submissions made by the learned Counsel for the parties, I am of the opinion that the interest of justice would be subserved in case the Writ Petition is disposed of with the following directions:
1- The petitioner will file a certified copy of this order before the Regional Provident Fund Commissioner, Varanasi (respondent No. 3) within three weeks from today.
2- The Regional Provident Fund Commissioner, Varanasi (respondent No. 3) will proceed to decide the Recall Application filed on behalf of the petitioner expeditiously preferably, within a period of six weeks from the date of filing of a certified copy of this order before him as mentioned in the Direction No. (1) above.
3- The recovery proceedings, pursuant to the notice dated 14th August, 2008 (Annexure 1 to the Writ Petition), will remain stayed for a period often weeks or till the disposal of the aforesaid Recall Application, whichever is earlier, provided within three weeks from today, the petitioner deposits with the respondent No. 3 an amount of Rs. 14,337/-. The amount so deposited by the petitioner will not be disbursed by the respondent No. 3 till the disposal of the Recall Application, and the fate of such deposit depend on the order passed by the Respondent No. 3 on the Recall Application.
In case of default on the part of the petitioner in complying with any of the aforesaid conditions, the above interim order regarding stay of recovery proceedings shall stand automatically vacated, and the above directions for disposing of the Recall Application would become inoperative.
The Writ Petition is, accordingly, disposed of with the above directions.
It is made clear that this Court has not adjudicated the claim of the petitioner on merits.
Certified copy of this order will be provided to the learned Counsel for the petitioner on payment of usual charges within three days.