SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2022 Supreme(SC) 159

AJAY RASTOGI, ABHAY S. OKA
Horticulture Experiment Station Gonikoppal, Coorg – Appellant
Versus
Regional Provident Fund Organization – Respondent


Advocates appeared:
For the Appellant(s) :Praveen Swarup, Payal Swarup, R.K. Singh, K.P. Singh, Advocates
For the Respondent(s):Aishwarya Bhati, Manisha Chava, Archana Pathak Dave, Vanya Gupta, B.L.N.Shivani, Avnish Dave, Advocates

JUDGMENT :

Rastogi, J.

1. The instant appeals are directed against the common judgment and order dated 26th October, 2009 passed by the Division Bench of the High Court of Karnataka at Bangalore.

2. That while setting aside the judgment of the learned Single Judge dated 3rd February, 2009, it was observed that once the employer has failed to deposit the contribution of EPF or committed default as mandated under the provisions of the Employees Provident Fund & Miscellaneous Provisions Act, 1952 (hereinafter referred to as the “Act 1952”), having failed to do so after determination under Section 7A by the competent authority, levy of damages is a sine qua non and upheld the order for recovery of damages in the proceedings initiated under Section 14B of the Act 1952.

3. The undisputed facts culled out from the record are that the establishment of the appellant(s) is covered under the provisions of the Act 1952. On 31st December, 1974, under Code no.KN/8573 under scheduled head “Fruit Orchards”, the appellant(s) failed to comply with the provisions of Act 1952 from 1st January, 1975 to 31st October, 1988. For non-compliance of the mandate of Act 1952, proceedings were initiated under Secti

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
Judicial Analysis

Based on the provided documents, one specific legal principle has been identified as being "altered" or effectively superseded by the Supreme Court of India in the *Horticulture Experiment Station* case.

* **Assistant Provident Fund Commissioner, EPFO VS Management of RSL Textiles India Pvt. Ltd. Thr. its Director - 2017 0 Supreme(SC) 32: "The presence or absence of mens rea and/or actus reus is a determinative factor in imposing damages under Section 14B of the Employee's Provident Fund and Miscellaneous Provisions Act, 1952."

* **Reasoning:** Multiple case entries (e.g., District Project Officer, M/s. Sarva Shiksha Abhiyan, Cochin vs Assistant Provident Fund Commissioner, O/o. The Employees Provident Fund Organisation, Sub Regional Office, KOCHI - 2025 Supreme(Online)(KER) 12331, KERALA STATE CHALACHITRA ACADEMY vs ASSISTANT PROVIDENT FUND COMMR. - 2024 Supreme(Online)(KER) 37621, ABUBAKKAR SIDDIQUE.M vs STATE OF KERALA - 2025 Supreme(Online)(KER) 12331) clarify that the Supreme Court's ruling in *Horticulture Experiment Station* established that "mens rea and/or actus reus is **not** a necessary ingredient." Therefore, the legal position stated in Assistant Provident Fund Commissioner, EPFO VS Management of RSL Textiles India Pvt. Ltd. Thr. its Director - 2017 0 Supreme(SC) 32 is now considered bad law.

* **The Assistant Provident Fund Commissioner vs M/s.Salem Textiles Limited, - 2025 Supreme(Online)(Mad) 28904:**

* **Reasoning:** Explicitly states: "This position later stood altered in view of the judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India in Horticulture Experiment Station."

**Followed / Cited as Authoritative**

The vast majority of the provided entries cite *Horticulture Experiment Station, Gonikoppal, Coorg v. Regional Provident Fund Organization (2022) 4 SCC 516* as the prevailing law regarding the imposition of damages under Section 14B of the EPF Act.

* **Cases citing for reliance:** B. N. S. D. Shiksha Niketan Uchchatar Madhyamik Vidyalaya VS Regional Provident Fund Commissioner - 2023 0 Supreme(All) 596, Maharaja Lakshman Sen Memorial College, Sunder Nagar VS Presiding Officer, Employees Provident Fund Appellate Tribunal - 2023 0 Supreme(HP) 167, Assistant Provident Fund Commissioner VS Employees Provident Fund Appellate Tribunal New Delhi - 2023 0 Supreme(Telangana) 71, Central Board of Trustees, Employees Provident Fund VS Bake ‘N’ Joy Hot Bakery - 2024 0 Supreme(Ker) 10, CENTRAL BOARD OF TRUSTEES, EMPLOYEES PROVIDENT FUND vs BAKE ‘N’ JOY HOT BAKERY - 2024 Supreme(Online)(KER) 51245, District Project Officer, M/s. Sarva Shiksha Abhiyan, Cochin vs Assistant Provident Fund Commissioner, O/o. The Employees Provident Fund Organisation, Sub Regional Office, KOCHI - 2025 Supreme(Online)(KER) 12331, CENTRAL BOARD OF TRUSTIES EPF vs KERALA ELECTRICAL AND ALLIED ENGINEERING COM LTD. - 2024 Supreme(Online)(KER) 49922, Reddy Enterprises VS Union of India - 2024 0 Supreme(AP) 160, KERALA STATE CHALACHITRA ACADEMY vs ASSISTANT PROVIDENT FUND COMMR. - 2024 Supreme(Online)(KER) 37621, KERALA STATE CHALACHITRA ACADEMY vs ASSISTANT PROVIDENT FUND COMMR. - 2024 Supreme(Online)(Ker) 63301, Indian Security Force VS Employees Provident Fund Organization - 2024 0 Supreme(Telangana) 357, Balachandika Security Force India Pvt. Ltd. VS Employees Provident Fund Organization - 2024 0 Supreme(Telangana) 646, Employer concerned vs Assistant Provident Fund Commissioner, Employees' Provident Fund Organisation, Madurai - 2024 Supreme(Online)(Mad) 54739, India Jute & Industries Ltd. VS Regional Provident Fund Commissioner-II - 2024 0 Supreme(Cal) 1085, T. P. METALS & ROOFINGS, PARAPPANPOYIL VS ASSISTANT TAX OFFICER (INT) MALAPPURAM - 2024 0 Supreme(Ker) 893, KERALA STATE CIVIL SUPPLIES CORPORATION LTD. VS ASSISTANT PROVIDENT FUND COMMISSIONER EMPLOYEES PROVIDENT FUND ORGANISATION, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM - 2024 0 Supreme(Ker) 845, PALAKKAD DISTRICT OC-OPERATIVE HOSPITAL AND RESEARCH CENTRE LTD. NO. P878 vs EMPLOYEES PROVIDENT FUND ORGANISATION - 2024 Supreme(Online)(KER) 39499, THE DY. DIRECTOR, SUB REGIONAL OFFICE, ESI CORPORATION, MALUS COMPLEX, ST.FRANCIS CHURCH ROAD, KALOOR, KOCHI 17. vs P.D.VIJAYAKUMAR INDIRA MOTORS, NAGAMPADAM, KOTTAYAM. - 2024 Supreme(Online)(KER) 55599, Dy. Director VS P. D. Vijayakumar - 2024 0 Supreme(Ker) 1248, Central Board of Trustees vs Puliampatti PACB Ltd. - 2025 0 Supreme(Mad) 3582, Central Board Of Trustees Employees Provident Fund Organisation Through Its Regional Provident Fund Commissioner Vs Puliampatti Pacb Ltd., Palani - 2025 Supreme(Online)(MAD) 4936, Regional Provident Fund Commissioner Employees Provident Fund Organization Vs Presiding Officer Employee's Provident Fund Appellate Tribunal - 2025 Supreme(Online)(MAD) 9762, The Central Board of Trustees vs Teknoturf Info Services Pvt. Ltd - 2025 Supreme(Online)(Mad) 38234, The Assistant Provident Fund Commissioner Office of the Regional Provident Fund Commissioner Lady Doak College Road Chokkikulam, Madurai District vs 1.The Presiding Officer The Employees' Provident Funds Appellate Tribunal Scope Minor, Core II, 4th Floor Lakshmi Nagar District Centre Lakshmi Nagar, New Delhi-110 092 - 2025 Supreme(Online)(MAD) 16214, Regional Provident Fund Commissioner Employees Provident Fund Organisation vs J.J.College Engineering and Technology rep. through its Principal of the Institution - 2025 0 Supreme(Mad) 2796, THE REGIONAL PROVIDENT FUND vs M/s.J.J.College Engineering - 2025 Supreme(Online)(Mad) 79557, ABUBAKKAR SIDDIQUE.M vs STATE OF KERALA - 2025 Supreme(Online)(KER) 12331, Central Board of Trustees, Employees Provident Fund Organization vs M/S Urmila Info Solutions - 2025 Supreme(Online)(Pat) 1635, Central Board of Trustees, EPFO through the Regional P. F Commissioner-II VS Urmila Info Solutions - 2025 0 Supreme(Pat) 446, M/s Office Of The District Commandant Bihar Home Guards, Chapra vs The Employees Provident Fund Organization Ministry of Labour, Government of India - 2025 Supreme(Online)(Pat) 551, Office of the District Commandant Bihar Home Guards, Chapra, District Saran VS Employees Provident Fund Organization Ministry of Labour, Government of India - 2025 0 Supreme(Pat) 518, Assistant Provident Fund Commissioner, Employees’ Provident Fund Organisation vs Indian Foods Private Limited - 2025 0 Supreme(Mad) 4563, Central Board of Trustees Employees P.F. Organization vs Megha Design Pvt. Ltd. - 2025 0 Supreme(Cal) 869, Steel Authority of India Limited vs Regional Provident Fund Commissioner - 2025 0 Supreme(Cal) 899, DEPUTY DIRECTOR EMPLOYEES STATE INSURANCE CORPORATION vs M/S. MALABAR MEDICAL COLLEGE HOSPITAL - 2025 Supreme(Online)(Ker) 47472, The Regional Provident Fund Commissioner vs M/s.Sri Venkatesa Paper & Board - 2025 Supreme(Online)(Mad) 73843, M/S. ASSISI CHARITABLE SOCIETY vs THE REGIONAL PROVIDENT FUND COMMISSIONER - 2026 Supreme(Online)(Ker) 18783, Ayurdhara Pharmaceuticals vs Regional Provident Fund Commissioner - 2026 Supreme(Online)(Ker) 31098.

* **Reasoning:** These entries consistently refer to the 2022 Supreme Court judgment to define the scope of authority for the EPF Appellate Tribunal, the lack of necessity for *mens rea*, or the mandatory nature of contributions and damages.

**Statutory/General Principles**

* **Union of India VS Dharamendra Textile Processors - 2008 8 Supreme 206:** Deals with Section 11AC of the Central Excise Act.

* **MCLEOD RUSSEL INDIA LIMITED VS REG. PROVIDENT FUND COMMISSIONER, JALPAIGURI - 2014 6 Supreme 714:** Deals with the recovery of damages from managements.

* **Reasoning:** These are general legal statements provided in the list that do not directly relate to the judicial treatment of the *Horticulture Experiment Station* case but represent independent legal propositions.

* **S. Mohammed Nowfal VS State Of Kerala Represented By Public Prosecutor - 2024 0 Supreme(Ker) 1121:** This entry describes factual circumstances of an employer deducting contributions but failing to deposit them. It does not explicitly mention the *Horticulture Experiment Station* case or its impact on the facts presented.

* **Regional Director, Employees' State Insurance Corporation vs Bombay Gymkhana Ltd. - 2026 0 Supreme(Bom) 434:** Mentions "(2007) 1 SCC 584" in conjunction with *Horticulture Experiment Station*. It is unclear if there is a conflict or if the 2007 case is being distinguished, as the snippet is fragmented.

SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top