Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ALLAHABAD
SAURABH SHYAM SHAMSHERY, J.
M/S U.P. National Manufacturers Ltd - Petitioner
Versus
Employees Provident Fund Appellate Tribunal/CGIT and 3 Others - Respondents
WRIT C NO. 3543 OF 2020.
Decided On : 21-02-2023
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. damages assessed under relevant provisions of the act (Para 2 , 3) |
| 2. disagreement on discretion and delay in authority (Para 4 , 5) |
| 3. reduction of damages by the court (Para 6) |
| 4. writ petition disposed with directions (Para 7) |
JUDGMENT
Saurabh Shyam Shamshery, J.
Heard Sri Devesh Tripathi, learned counsel for petitioner and Sri Ashish Jaiswal, Advocate for Respondents.
2. Petitioner, an organization, is aggrieved from quantum of damages determined by Assistant Provident Fund Commissioner by means of impugned order passed under Section 14B of Employees' Provident Fund and Miscellaneous Provisions Act, 1952 (hereinafter referred to as "Act, 1952").
3. Damages determined under Section 14B of Act, 1952 is Rs. 2,10,132/- and under Section 7Q is Rs. 99,509/-, total being Rs. 3,09,641/-. In pursuance of interim order passed by this Court half of amount has already been deposited by petitioner.
4. Learned counsel for petitioner submits that respondents have approached appropriate authority after a huge delay of 8-9 years which was not considered by authority as well as considering the financial condition of petitioner there was no mens ria in depositing the contribution belatedly and further prayed that since there is a discretion lies under Section 14B and 7Q of Act, 1952, therefore, damages and interest may be reduced.
5. Learned counsel appearing for respondents submits that petitioner has not raised the above contention before appropriate authority and interest deposited in terms of order passed under Section 7Q is for benefit of employees and there is no discretion in said provision. However, he fairly submits that this Court may determine quantum of penalty passed under Section 14B of Act, 1952.
6. Taking note of above submissions as well as that there was a delay on behalf of respondents also and that financial condition of petitioner is also appears to be not good, therefore, without interfering with interest fixed under Section 7Q of Act, 1952, the damages under Section 14B is reduced from Rs. 2,10,132/- to Rs. 1,25,000/- only. Petitioner is directed to deposit remaining amount, after deducting the amount already deposited, within two months from today.
7. With aforesaid observation, the writ petition is disposed of.
Damages for delayed payment under the EPF Act cannot exceed the amount of arrears, and interest cannot be levied on penal amounts without statutory authority.
The court affirmed that under Section 14-B of the Employees Provident Fund & Miscellaneous Provisions Act, 1952, only 50% of damages are recoverable, as established by prior judicial decisions.
For the imposition of damages under Section 14B of the Employees Provident Fund and Miscellaneous Provisions Act, 1952, the establishment of mens rea is not a mandatory requirement. Once a delay in r....
The main legal point established in the judgment is the interpretation of Sections 14-B and 7-Q of the Act of 1952 and the grant of a stay on the recovery of damages and interest based on compliance ....
Interest under Section 7Q of the Act is independent of damages under Section 14B, and claims regarding interest must be pursued in the pending appeal.
Damages under Section 14B leviable for delayed PF remittance without need for mens rea; Tribunal's discretion upheld.
Compliance with the deposit requirements under the Employees' Provident Funds and Miscellaneous Provisions Act, 1952 is essential to proceed with an appeal.
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
