The central legal point established in the judgment is that the survival of Co-operative Societies depends upon the concessions extended to them, and the benefit of waiver or reduction of damages should not be denied to co-operative institutions, considering their special footing and the government's policy to encourage their development and growth.

V. Ramasubramanian, J.

1. These appeals arise out of a common order passed by the learned Judge, in a batch of four writ petitions, dismissing a challenge to the imposition of damages under Section 14-B of the Employees' Provident Funds and Miscellaneous Provisions Act, 1952. Heard P. Chandrabose, learned Counsel appearing for the appellants and G.R. Swaminathan, learned Counsel appearing for the E.P.F. Organisation in W.A. (MD) Nos. 228 to 230 of 2011 and K. Muralisankar, learned Counsel appearing for the E.P.F. Organisation in W.A. (MD) No. 365 of 2011.

2. All the appellants before us are various District Co-operative Spinning Mills. They are all established in terms of the provisions of the Tamil Nadu Co-operative Societies Act, 1983.

3. On the ground that the appellants failed to Comply with the provisions of the Act, the Regional Assistant provident Fund Commissioner passed orders levying damages in terms of Section 14-B of the Act. The appellants filed petitions before the central board of Trustees on 21.03.2005, seeking a waiver of the damages on par with sick Industrial Companies.

4. Simultaneously, the appellants also approached the Government of Tamil Nadu Relief Undertaking (Special provisions) Act, 1969. The Government of Tamil Nadu by G.O. Ms. No. 58, Handlooms, Handicrafts, Textiles & Khadi (C1) Department, dated 07.04.2005 declared Certain Co-operative Spinning mills in the State of Tamil Nadu as relief undertakings for a period of two years with effect from 18.07.2003. The appellants in these writ appeals are included in the list of relief undertakings so declared by the said Government Order.

5. After a period of about two years, Central Board of Trustees of the E.P.F. Organisation rejected the request of all the appellants for the waiver of damages by identical but independent orders dated 05.02.2007. Challenging the orders dated 05.02.2007 passed by the Central Board of Trustees, the appellants filed writ petitions in W.P. (MD) Nos. 2514 and 2534 of 2007 and 5934 and 1129 of 2008. But these writ Petitions were dismissed by a learned Judge of this Court by a common order dated 30.11.2010 on the ground that declaration of an Industry as a "Relief undertaking" under the Tamil Nadu Relief Undertaking (Special provisions) Act, 1969, will not save the appellants from the operation of the provisions of the Employees' Provident Funds and Miscellaneous Provisions Act, 1952. The learned Judge, also held that even if a mill is declared as a "sick industry" by the Board for Industrial and Financial Reconstruction, Section 22 of the Sick Industrial Companies (Special Provisions) Act, 1985 will not protect such industries from the operation of provisions of the Act. On these two grounds, the learned Judge dismissed the writ petitions filed by the appellants.

6. The grievance of the appellants is that the Co-operative Spinning mills have already suffered enough at the hands of the various parries and that to impose a burden in the form of damages under Section 14-B, would virtually kill the Co-operative Societies. The appellants contend that the Central Board of Trustees did not even consider in the right perspective whether the appellants were entitled to the benefit of waiver or not. The order dated 05.02.2007 passed by the Central Board of Trustees which was impugned in the writ petitions did not contain any reason except to the effect that the request was outside the ambit of second proviso to Section 14-B of the EPF and MP Act. Therefore, it is contended by Chandrabose, learned counsel appearing for the appellants perspective by the Central Board of Trustees.

7. In order to understand the correctness of the contention of the learned Counsel appearing for the appellants, it is necessary to have a look at some of the provisions of the Act and the Scheme. Section 14-B empowers the organization to recover from the employer, such damages by way of penalty, not exceeding the amount of arrears, whenever an employer commit