The court affirmed the imperative for timely administrative processing of exemption applications under the EPF Act to protect employee interests and prevent unwarranted penalties.

JUDGMENT

Prathiba M. Singh, J. (Oral)--This hearing has been done in physical Court. Hybrid mode is permitted in cases where permission is being sought from the Court.

2. The present petition has been filed by the Petitioner-Company, which had established a Private Provident Fund Trust for its employees with the approval of the Commissioner of Income Tax, Delhi. The said Provident Fund Trust was named as BT (Worldwide) Employees Provident Fund and was later renamed as BT India Private Limited Provident Fund. The Petitioner-Company had sought exemption under Section 17(2) of the Employees' Provident Fund and Miscellaneous Provisions Act, 1952 (hereinafter, "EPF Act"), read with paragraph 27A of the Employees' Provident Fund Scheme 1952, based on the fact that its employees were in receipt of benefits the nature of a Private Provident Fund, which were no less favourable than the benefits provided under the EPF Act 1952. The Petitioner was already enjoying relaxation when it was located in Gurgaon, and after shifting to New Delhi on 24th January, 2013, it had made representations in respect of the same. The prayers in the writ petition are:

"(a) Issue a Writ of or in the nature of Mandamus commanding the Respondents and the Respondent Nos. 1-3 in particular and each one of them, their men, agents, assigns and subordinates to immediately dispose of the application for grant of exemption under Section 17(2) of the said Act of 1952 read with paragraph 27 A of the EPF Scheme, 1952 in relation to the Employees of the Petitioner's establishment in a time-bound manner and in the interim grant an order of relaxation under paragraph 79 of the EPF Scheme 1952;

(b) Alternatively, issue a Writ of or in the nature of Mandamus, commanding the Respondents to give appropriate directions and issue guidelines to the Petitioner and the Respondents' Board of Trustees for transferring the accumulated fund of the Respondents' Board of Trustees to the Office of Respondent No. 3 being the Regional Provident Fund Commissioner, Dwarka, and to take such other action as may be deemed necessary for the purpose of transferring the fund and/or investment made by the Respondent No. 2's Board of Trustees;

(c) Pass an ad interim order in terms of the prayer above;

(d) Pass any other appropriate writ or writs or order or orders and direction or directions; and/or

(e) Such further and/or other orders be passed, direction and/or directions be given as to this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper."

3. Vide the last order dated 18th August 2021, this Court had, after hearing ld. Senior Counsels and Counsels for the parties, observed as under:

"7. The present petition is one which involves Provident Fund benefits for all the Petitioner's employees, qua which, the Petitioner was already enjoying relaxation when it was located in Gurgaon, and after shifting to New Delhi on 24th January, 2013, it had made representations in respect of the same. On the said application made by the Petitioner, the EPFO had recommended the exemption vide its recommendation dated 13th July, 2016 in the following terms:

"11. The System of Monitoring that exists is as under:.

a) The exempted establishments are required to file a monthly return and another return on a yearly basis in the format prescribed.

b) There is a yearly inspection which also includes audit of the trust being maintained by such establishments which are relaxed under Para 79 of the Scheme or have been granted exemption by the Appropriate Government.

c) The Provident Fund maintained by the Board of Trustees are subject to audit by a qualified independent Chartered Accountant annually. Wherever necessary the EPFO has a right to ha