Back
2012 Supreme(Del) 1834
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
RAJIV SAHAI ENDLAW & A.K. SIKRI, JJ.
ROMA HENNY SECURITY SERVICES PVT. LTD. – PETITIONER
VERSUS
CENTRAL BOARD OF TRUSTEES, E.P.F. ORGANIZATION THROUGH ASSISTANT P.F. COMMISSIONER, DELHI (NORTH) – RESPONDENT
W.P.(C) 831 OF 2012
Decided On : 24.8.2012.
Mr. S.P. Arora, Advocate.
Ms. Aparna Bhat, with Ms. Raj Kumari Banju, Advocates.
Damages under Section 14-B of the Provident Fund Act were held to include the interest chargeable under Section 7-Q for the relevant period, based on the interpretation of the provisions and subsequent circulars.
Headnote:
Interest - Provident Fund Act - Section 14-B, Section 7-Q
Fact of the Case:
The petitioner, an establishment covered by the Provident Fund Act, disputed the recovery of interest under Section 7-Q of the Act, contending that it was already included in the damages imposed under Section 14-B. The petitioner's challenge was based on the interpretation of the provisions and a previous judgment.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the damages under Section 14-B of the Act included the interest chargeable under Section 7-Q for the relevant period. As a result, the recovery of interest under Section 7-Q in addition to the damages was held to be unjustified.
Issues: Interpretation of provisions of Section 14-B and Section 7-Q of the Provident Fund Act, and the applicability of a previous judgment.
Ratio Decidendi: The damages under Section 14-B were held to include the interest chargeable under Section 7-Q for the relevant period, based on the interpretation of the provisions and subsequent circulars.
Final Decision: The court set aside the order directing payment of interest under Section 7-Q and directed the Provident Fund Department to refund the wrongly recovered amount along with interest.
HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV SHAKDHER A.K. SIKRI, ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE:
1. Vide orders dated 13.7.2012 the Division Bench referred the matter for determination of question of law, which arises in this petition, by a Larger Bench. The reason for reference of the matter to the Larger Bench was the judgment given by the earlier Division Bench in the case of M/S System and Stampings and Anr. Vs. Employees’ Provident Fund Appellate Tribunal and Ors. 2008 LLR 485. It was argued by the respondents that certain facts/provisions could not be pointed out to the Division Bench and had that position been there before the Court, it would have changed the direction of the judgment. The Division Bench felt that in case the stand of the respondent is accepted, that would result in taking contrary view to the view taken by the Division Bench in M/S System and Stampings (supra), and for this reason, it would be appropriate if the matter is referred to the Larger Bench for determination. The facts are stated in detail in the reference order dated 13.7.2012. However, for complete understanding of the issue at hand, it would be necessary to re-visit those facts and incorporate in the present order, which we now proceed to do.
2. The petitioner is an establishment engaged in supplies of manpower for the purposes of security and surveillance to different establishments and is covered by the provisions of the PF Act. It is allotted Code Number DL-27506. It appears that the petitioner had not paid provident fund contribution and other contribution including administrative charges payable under different provisions of the said Act in time and because of this late payment the Assistant Provident Fund Commissioner initiated proceedings for recovery of damages under Section 14-B of the Act. These proceedings culminated in passing of order dated 26.11.2010 holding that the establishment had failed to pay, within prescribed time limit:-
(i) The Provident Fund contribution;
(ii) The Employees’ Pension contribution;
(iii) The Insurance Fund contribution; and
(iv) The Administrative charges For the period from 06/99 to 06/04, 03/05 to 05/05, 07/05 to 01/07, 05/07 to 08/08, 10/08, 10/08.
3. For this reason, damages in the sum of Rs. 7,10,989/- were imposed under Section 14-B of the Act; details of which are as under:-
For the period from 06/99 to 06/04, 03/05 to 05/05, 07/05 to 08/08, 10/08, 10/08 totalling Rs. 710989/- be recovered as per the account wise schedule indicted below from the employer in relation to M/s Roma Henny Security Services Pvt. Ltd. bearing code No. DL/27506:
Nature of damages Amount Account No.
P.F. contributions Rs. 165371/- 1
Administrative Charges Rs. 60889/- 2
FPF/EPS contributions Rs.456578/- 10
EDLI contributions Rs. 27610/- 21
EDLI administrative charges Rs. 541/- 22
Total Rs. 710989/-
(Rs. Seven Lac Ten Thousand Nine Hundred Eighty Nine only)
4. The order further indicated that the petitioner was also liable to remit a sum of Rs. 4,53,886/- towards interest payable under Section 7-Q of the PF Act @ 12% p.a. which provisions come into force vide notification dated 30.06.1997. The account wise detail of the amount payable towards Section 7-Q of the PF Act was furnished as follows:-
Nature of interest Amount Account
No. P.F. contributions Rs. 105249/- 1
Administrative charges Rs. 38918/- 2
FPF/EPs contributions Rs. 291705/- 10
EDLI contributions Rs. 17654/- 21
EDLI administrative charges Rs. 360/- 22
Total Rs. 4,53,886/-
The petitioner paid the amount of damages of Rs.7,10,989/- vide cheque No. 632192 dated 28.12.2010. By a separate letter of even date, the petitioner disputed the liability of interest under Section 7-Q of the Act on the ground that this amount had already been included in the amount of damages calculated by the respondent. The respondent however, did not accept this plea and issued attachment orders under Section 8F of the PF Act and attached the current acco
