Back
SAMEER JAIN
Rajasthan State Mines & Minerals Ltd. – Appellant
Versus
Employees Provident Fund Appellate Tribunal – Respondent
ORDER :
1. The present petition is filed against the impugned order dated 19.02.2010 passed by Presiding Officer, Employees Provident Fund Appellate Tribunal, New Delhi in ATA 509(12) 2006, titled as Rajasthan State Mines and Minerals Ltd. vs. Assistant Provident Fund Commissioner Jaipur and against the order dated 04.08.2006 passed by Assistant Provident Fund Commissioner Jaipur under Section 14B of the Employees Provident Fund and Misc. Provisions Act, 1952.
2. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the order(s) dated 19.02.2010 and 04.08.2006 have been passed in contravention of the settled position of law and while passing the said orders, the respondents have neither considered the relevant facts of the case nor have they abided by the mandate of the ad rem statutory provisions pertaining to the imposition of penalty by way of damages and the corresponding charges on interest. Hence, the impugned orders are non-est and void ab-initio.
3. In this background, while praying for the quashing of the orders referred herein-above, learned counsel for the petitioner has apprised the Court of the brief and relevant factual matrix of the present petition. It is submitted tha
S.14B of Act read as Power to recover damages.
Mens rea is not required for imposing damages under the EPF Act; damages serve as penalties for defaults and ensure employee benefits, emphasizing the need for reasoned decisions from authorities.
Damages under Section 14B cannot be imposed without arrears; compliance with the Act negates default, and mens rea is not essential for penalties.
Damages under S.14B of the Employees' Provident Funds Act are penal and not compensatory, allowing for mechanical imposition up to 25% without ascertaining actual loss.
Imposition of damages – Mens rea or actus reus is not an essential element for imposing penalty or damages for breach of civil obligations and liabilities.
The delay in EPF remittance does not exempt the employer from penalties, as mens rea is not required for imposing damages under Section 14-B of the Act.
Mens rea is not required for imposing damages under Section 14B of the Employees' Provident Funds Act; penalties must reflect the circumstances of each case.
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
