Full Text
Translation output
$-20 HIGH COURT OF DELHI
W.P.(C) 877/2015
M/S JYOTI ENGINEERS Petitioner
Through: Mr.Advitiya Tiwari, Adv.
W.P.(C) 877/2015
M/S JYOTI ENGINEERS Petitioner
Through: Mr.Advitiya Tiwari, Adv.
VERSUS
UOI &ORS. Respondents
Through; Mr.Rajesh Kumar, Adv. for R-1.
Mr.R.C. Chawla, Adv. for R-2 & 3.
Through; Mr.Rajesh Kumar, Adv. for R-1.
Mr.R.C. Chawla, Adv. for R-2 & 3.
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE V.P.VAISH
03.02.2015 CM No.1533/2015 The application is allowed subject to all just exceptions.
Theapplication stands disposed of.
03.02.2015 CM No.1533/2015 The application is allowed subject to all just exceptions.
Theapplication stands disposed of.
W.P.(C) 877/2015 & CM No.l532/201f>
By this petition under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution ofIndia, the petitioner has assailed order dated 03.11.2014 passed by
Assistant Provident Fund Commissioner whereby the petitioner was assessed under Section 14B of the Employees Provident Fund and
Miscellaneous Provisions Act, 1952 (for short 'Act').
Notice.
Mr.Rajesh Kumar, Advocate accepts notice for respondent
No.l and Mr.R.C. Chawla, Advocate accepts notice for respondent
Nos.2 and 3 and submit that they do not wish to file reply to the
2015:DHC:11570 petition.
With the consent of counsel for the parties, the matter is taken up for final hearing.
The brief facts as set out in the present case are that the petitioner is a supplier of workers to various companies, establishments etc. as per their requirements on a day-to-day basis.
The petitioner is covered under provisions ofthe Act. Vide summons dated 05.03.2014, the respondent No.3 determined damages worth
Rs.6,17,530/- (Rupees Six lakh seventeen thousand five hundred and thirty) along with interest thereon under Section 14B ofthe Act to be paid by the petitioner. Vide order dated 03.11.2014, the petitioner was directed to pay the aforementioned amount within 15 days of receipt of this order failing which action was to be taken under
Section 8ofthe Act to recover the amount in the same manner as laid down under Section8B and 8G of the Act.
Learned counsel for the petitioner urges that the petitioner has filed an appeal under Section 71 ofthe Act before the Tribunal along with an application for stay. However, the appeal could not be heard as the Presiding Officer of EPF Tribunal has been discharged of his duties and no new Presiding Officer has joined. He has relied upon the
By this petition under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution ofIndia, the petitioner has assailed order dated 03.11.2014 passed by
Assistant Provident Fund Commissioner whereby the petitioner was assessed under Section 14B of the Employees Provident Fund and
Miscellaneous Provisions Act, 1952 (for short 'Act').
Notice.
Mr.Rajesh Kumar, Advocate accepts notice for respondent
No.l and Mr.R.C. Chawla, Advocate accepts notice for respondent
Nos.2 and 3 and submit that they do not wish to file reply to the
2015:DHC:11570 petition.
With the consent of counsel for the parties, the matter is taken up for final hearing.
The brief facts as set out in the present case are that the petitioner is a supplier of workers to various companies, establishments etc. as per their requirements on a day-to-day basis.
The petitioner is covered under provisions ofthe Act. Vide summons dated 05.03.2014, the respondent No.3 determined damages worth
Rs.6,17,530/- (Rupees Six lakh seventeen thousand five hundred and thirty) along with interest thereon under Section 14B ofthe Act to be paid by the petitioner. Vide order dated 03.11.2014, the petitioner was directed to pay the aforementioned amount within 15 days of receipt of this order failing which action was to be taken under
Section 8ofthe Act to recover the amount in the same manner as laid down under Section8B and 8G of the Act.
Learned counsel for the petitioner urges that the petitioner has filed an appeal under Section 71 ofthe Act before the Tribunal along with an application for stay. However, the appeal could not be heard as the Presiding Officer of EPF Tribunal has been discharged of his duties and no new Presiding Officer has joined. He has relied upon the
ORDER
of this Court in 'Elbee Services Ltd. vs. Union of
India &Ors.' in W.P.(C) No.10369/2004 decided on 01.11.2004.
Learned counsel for respondents who appeared on advance notice did not dispute the fact that there is no Presiding Officer of
EPF Appellate Tribunal and the matter regarding appointment of
Presiding Officer, EPF Appellate Tribunal is under process.
Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and the submissions made by learned counsel for both the parties, it is directed that till the appeal and application for stay are heard by the
Tribunal, no coercive steps be taken against the petitioner to enforce the impugned orderdated03.11.2014. It is expected that the Tribunal shall hear and dispose of the appeal as well as application for stay as expeditiously as possible.
With the aforesaid observations, the petition andthe application stand disposed of
FEBRUARY 03, 2015
India &Ors.' in W.P.(C) No.10369/2004 decided on 01.11.2004.
Learned counsel for respondents who appeared on advance notice did not dispute the fact that there is no Presiding Officer of
EPF Appellate Tribunal and the matter regarding appointment of
Presiding Officer, EPF Appellate Tribunal is under process.
Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and the submissions made by learned counsel for both the parties, it is directed that till the appeal and application for stay are heard by the
Tribunal, no coercive steps be taken against the petitioner to enforce the impugned orderdated03.11.2014. It is expected that the Tribunal shall hear and dispose of the appeal as well as application for stay as expeditiously as possible.
With the aforesaid observations, the petition andthe application stand disposed of
FEBRUARY 03, 2015