2003 Supreme(Guj) 41

Gujarat High Court
Judgename :RAVI R.TRIPATHI
MANSA NAGRIK SAHAKARI BANK LIMITED - Appellant
Versus
REGIONAL PROVIDENT FUND COMMISSIONER, AHMEDABAD - Respondent
S.C.A. 7436 of 2001
Decided On : 01/30/2003

Headnote:

Employees Provident Fund and Misc. Provisions Act, 1952 - Section 7a, section 7a (i), subsection (1) of section 7a - Cooperative Societies Act, 1912 Section 16 (1) - Petition is filed seeking a declaration that the provisions of the Employees Provident Funds and Miscellaneous Provisions Act are not applicable to the petitioner Bank - It is also prayed that a writ of certiorari or a writ of mandamus or a writ order or direction in the nature of certiorari or mandamus or any other writ order or direction of a like nature be issued quashing and setting aside the impugned action of the respondent authority in making applicable the provisions of the Act to the petitioner - Besides this the other reliefs sought for are that the action of the respondent directing the Bank to open Provident Fund Account being and direction to deposit contribution every month in it be quashed and set aside that a direction be issued against the authorities to refund the amount so far deposited by the petitioner Bank in PF Account No. with interest at the rate of per annum from the date of depositing such amounts till such amounts are repaid, that the impugned Order a copy of which is at Annexure b to the petition - Order which is at Annexure d to the petition, Order which is at Annexure g, and Orders No. dated and dated which are produced at Annexure be quashed and set aside - It has challenged the order passed by the authorities under the State Act, a benevolent legislation - Act is brought on the Statute Book, as mentioned by the learned author Mr. Justice S. R. Roy in his book on the subject to provide effective social security measures for toiling workers so that it brings prosperity - Object of the Act is to provide protection from the distress and destitution in old age and to see that his family does not suffer utter ruin in case of premature death or disablement - Act is amended from time to time so as to see that adequate protection is given not only to the worker but to his family also - To ensure the aforesaid object, the Act was amended in the year and the amount due from the employer as Employees Contribution to the Provident Fund is made first charge on the assets of the establishment under liquidation to make the Act more effective - It is again amended in the year to provide for setting up independent machinery to recover outstanding Provident Fund dues and other dues from the defaulting employers - Held, Assume an establishment working without the aid of power is if not impossible is definitely very difficult - Bank works with the aid of power not only for the purpose of light and cooling to the employees and its customers but also for its computers and other gadgets used in the Bank in providing effective service to its customers - In the 21st Century to contend that an establishment like cooperative Bank working in cities is working without the aid of power is ridiculous - Contention of is turned down on this ground alone the petitioner establishment wanted the authorities to hold that the provisions of the Act are not applicable the same has no substance hence rejected cited some decisions High Court to contend that the words are to be considered to mean that they will have application only to manufacturing units - Court is of the opinion that in view of the aforesaid discussion these decisions have no application to the facts of the case on hand - Petitioner establishment that the provisions of the Act are applicable to the establishment with effect from and for that the authorities have relied upon a report dated - Enforcement Office - He submitted that a copy of the report is not made available to the petitioner establishment is not able to point out any document or any averments whereby it could be established that the petitioner establishment had ever demanded a copy of that report and despite that demand the same is not made available to the petitioner - Contention is raised for the first time and it is nothing but an after-thought - Purpose is also not difficult to be assumed that is, avoiding payment of legitimate dues which are ordered to be paid - Present petition fails and the same is dismissed with cost of Rupees seven thousand and five hundred only and direction that the amount which is payable shall be paid within eight weeks from the date of receipt of this order with interest as applicable under the provisions of law - Bank will deposit the amount within eight weeks - He requested that the order of costs may not be passed. Having found the request reasonable the same is accepted - Petition is dismissed.