M/s G.B. Pant University Of Agriculture And Technology & Others Vs Presiding Officer Employees Provident Fund & Others

AI Structured Summary

Not yet generated for this judgment

Judgment

184 paragraphs · 2,572 words

Sharad Kumar Sharma, J

These Writ Petitions have been preferred by the petitioner, which is the creation of Statute and is presently running an academic institution of an esteemed prestige in the Country. A proceeding under the provisions of Employees Provident Fund and Misc. Provisions Act, 1952, hereinafter, to be called as an "Act of 1952", was initiated by the respondent as against the petitioner on account of their inaction of not making the regular contribution, which they were otherwise liable to be mandatorily deposited as per the criteria laid down under the Act of 1952 and hence, as a consequence of non remittance of the amount of employers contribution in reliation to the years as narrated in para 4 of the Writ Petition, which was in relation to the number of workman, as given in column No. 3, for whom amount due was to be paid. The proceeding was initiated by the respondents by issuing notices to the present petitioner on 07.12.2002. As per the notice given therein by the respondents, it was contended about the claim raised by respondent with regard to the payment of interest and damages on account of a belated remittance of employers contribution by invoking the provisions contained under Sections 7Q and Section 14B of the Act of 1952. In the show cause notice, thus issued, it was mentioned that if the response to the liability as proposed to be imposed upon the petitioner, referred in the notice, if it is not responded by the petitioner within the specified time given in the show cause notice itself, the Assistant Provident Fund Commissioner has remarked that the office of the respondent would proceed to determine the liability payable under Sections 7Q and 14B as settled in the show cause notice, which has been issued and is subject matter of consideration in each of the respective Writ Petitions.

The case of the petitioner is that in response to the separate show cause notice dated 7th December, 2002, with regard to the respective settlement of the liability as depicted in the said notice itself, regarding different financial years, the petitioner has submitted their respective response by filing a reply to it on 27.02.2003, annexure No. 4 to the Writ petition, well within time as provided in the respective notice dated 07.12.2002.

The grievance, which has been raised by the petitioner in the present bunch of Writ Petition, since they involve a common consideration of facts and law, they are being decided together by this common judgments. The petitioner's case is that though the show cause notice dated 7th December, 2002, stood replied by the petitioner on 27th February, 2003, but, thereafter, when the respondents proceeded to take a decision on merits after filing reply to show case for imposing the liability under Section 14-B of the Act of 1952 to be read with Section 7Q of the Act of 1952, in fact, no opportunity thereafter had actually been provided to the petitioner while actually fixing the monetary liability was provided to the petitioner and, consequently, his grievance, which the learned Senior Counsel has extracted to argue against impugned order is from the view point that if the order is read in its totality, it does make a reference to the reply submitted by the petitioner to the show cause dated 07.12.2002, and in response to the show cause reply, but, in fact, the respondents have proceeded to re-assess the actual financial liability under the aforesaid provisions and have re-determined the amount payable by the impugned orders dated 30th April, 2003 and as a consequence thereto, the impugned order after the re-assessment determining the financial liability was made on 30th April, 2003, itself, an order was issued against the petitioners calling upon him to satisfy the demand of liability as settled in the impugned order dated 30th April, 2003.

Being aggrieved against the fixation of the liability under Section 7Q and 14B of the Act of 1952, the petitioner has approached this Court by filing Writ Petition, being Writ Petition No. 427 of 2003 (M/S), M/s G.B. Pant University of Agriculture and Technology Vs. Assistant Provident Fund Commissioner, as far as the present writ petitioner is concerned. The Coordinate Bench of this Court, while determining the propriety of the order of the revised assessment of the liability under Sections 7Q and Section 14B, as made by the order dated 30th April, 2003, was considered by this Court and this Court by the judgment dated 1st August, 2006 (passed in respective writ petitions referred in the table), which was passed after hearing the respondent has held that on the challenge being given by the petitioner to the impugned order dated 30th April, 2003, would not be tenable by invoking the writ jurisdiction of this Court under Article 227 of the Constitution of India because it was held by the said judgment of the Coordinate Bench of this Court that a statutory appeal would be maintainable under Section 7-I of the Act of 1952 and, consequently, the Writ Petitions were dismissed on the ground of availability of alternative remedy.

At this juncture, it is made clear that as far as the issue determined by the Coordinate Bench of this Court vide its judgment dated 1st August, 2006, holding thereof that the Writ Petition would not lie and the order under challenge, i.e. 30th April, 2003, would be an appealable order under Section 7-I of the Act. The said judgment of this Court was not agitated by the petitioners before any of the superior Court and hence, it would amount that they admit the fact that as against the order dated 30th April, 2003 and the determination made by this Court that the appeal would lie under Section 7-I has attained finality, attaining the finality inter se between the petitioner and the respondent .

But in compliance of the order disposing of the Writ Petition on the ground of availability of alternative remedy on account of a preliminary objection raised by the respondent in the Writ Petition, the petitioner had invoked the appellate jurisdiction by preferring Appeals, details of which, are given hereunder :-

S.No.

Earlier Writ Petition against Order dated 30.04.2003

Present Writ Petitions against Order dated 30.04.2003 and Order dated 09.06.2011 of ATA

Date of order impugned

A.T.A. No. (Appeal No. under Section 7-I)

Date of order