IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD
SUREPALLI NANDA, J.
M/s Balachandika Security Force India Pvt. Ltd. – Appellant
Versus
The Employees Provident Fund Organization. - Respondent
W.P. No. 4648 of 2023
Decided on : 15-04-2024
(A) Employees Provident Funds and Miscellaneous Provisions Act, 1952 - Sections 7(Q) and 14-B - Writ petition challenging the order imposing interest and damages under the Act - The court held that the petitioner must comply with the statutory obligations of timely EPF remittance, and the delay due to financial crises does not exempt the employer from penalties. The court emphasized that mens rea is not required for imposing damages under Section 14-B. (Paras 8, 10, 12, 13)
(B) Appeal - The court clarified that the appeal against the imposition of interest under Section 7(Q) is not maintainable as it is not covered under the provisions allowing for appeal. (Paras 17, 21)
ORDER :
Heard Mr P.U.Bhaskara Rao, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner and Ms T.Bala Jayasree, learned standing counsel appearing on behalf of the respondent.
2. The petitioner filed the present writ petition seeking prayer as under:
3. PERUSED THE RECORD
A. The order dated 17.02.2023 passed in the present writ petition, is as under:
As stated supra, in the impugned order dated 13.01.2023, Tribunal specifically mentioned that the petitioner herein had filed an appeal challenging the order passed under Section 14-B of the Act. Even then, Tribunal directed the petitioner to deposit an amount of Rs.31,62,339/-. Petitioner had filed copy of the order dated 04.08.2022 No.AP/HYD/2265544/PD-517/T-1/2022-23/326 passed under Section 7(Q) of the Act. Same number is mentioned in the impugned order. However, Sri G.Venkateshwarlu, learned counsel appearing for respondent Corporation on instructions would submit that the order under challenge before the Tribunal is under Section 14-B of the Act. In the impugned order, there is no consideration of the principle laid down by Hon'ble Apex Court in M/s Shiv Harbal Research Laboratory vs. Assistant P.F. Commissioner'.
It is apt to note that in the said judgment, Hon'ble Apex Court categorically held that, there is nothing to indicate that any part of the amount awarded under Section 14-B of the Act was required to be deposited at the time of filing of the appeal. Therefore, the impugned order is contrary to the provisions of the Act and also principle laid down by Apex Court in the aforesaid judgment. In view of the same, matter requires examination.
Therefore, till 14.03.2023, there shall be interim suspension of the impugned order dated 13.01.2023 in EPF appeal No.2 of 2023 passed by Central Government Industrial Tribunal cum Labour Court, Hyderabad to the extent of directing the petitioner to remit an amount of 20% of the amount determined under Section 14-B of the Act and an amount of Rs.31,62,339/- towards interest within four (04) weeks from the date of order.
However, it is made clear that proceedings before the Tribunal in the aforesaid appeal may go on.
List on 14.03.2023.
B) The order dated 20.02.2024 passed in I.A.No.2 of 2023 in W.P.No.4648 of 2023, reads as under :
Taking into consideration the submissions made by the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the vacate stay petitioner Mrs T.Balajayashree and duly taking into consideration the averments made in the affidavit filed in support of I.A.No.2 of 2023 in W.P.No.4648 of 2023 and duly considering the recent Judgment of the Apex Court dated 23.02.2022 in t
Horticulture Experiment Station, Gonikoppal, Coorg Vs. Regional Provident Fund Organisation
Arcot Textile Mills Ltd., vs. Regional Provident Fund, Commissioner & Others
Organo Chemical Industries & Anr vs Union of India & Ors, (1979 AIR 1803
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.
Delay in EPF contributions results in automatic penalties under Section 14B, independent of intent, reinforcing the strict liability principle in social welfare legislation.
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 for delayed payment under the EPF Act cannot exceed the amount of arrears, and interest cannot be levied on penal amounts without statutory authority.
Tribunal's requirement for a 20% pre-deposit under Section 14B of the EPF Act is invalid as no such provision exists for appeals under that section.
The orders imposing damages under the EPF Act must be reasoned and based on factual findings, ensuring principles of natural justice are upheld.
The levy of damages under the EPF Act requires consideration of the employer's financial status and adherence to natural justice principles.
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.