IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD R/SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 270 of 2025 ==========================================================

SHINGAR LIMITED Versus EMPLOYEES PROVIDENT FUND ORGANISATION & ORS.

==========================================================

Appearance:

MR DIPAK R DAVE(1232) for the Petitioner(s) No. 1 MR PATHIK M ACHARYA(3520) for the Respondent(s) No. 1,2,3 ========================================================== CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE HEMANT M. PRACHCHHAK Date : 28/11/2025

ORAL ORDER

1. Present petition is filed by the petitioner under Articles 14, 21 and 226 of the Constitution of India read with the provision of Sections 14B, 7Q and 8F of the Employees Provident Fund and Miscellaneous Provisions of 1952 against the impugned orders dated 7.10.2024 and

29.11.2024 passed by the respondent authorities.

2. The brief facts giving rise to present petition are that in present petition, the petitioner, who is a company engaging in the business of manufacturing cosmetics products has challenged illegal and unjustified actions on the part of the respondents inasmuch as the petitioner’s request for waiver and/or reduction of damages has remained undecided despite repeated reminders. Without deciding the petitioner’s request, coercive recovery action has been initiated which has resulted in serious financial hardship to the petitioner.

2.1 When a further reminder was sent, the petitioner was informed that the request for reduction of damages has been turned down, that too without granting an opportunity of hearing, without following due procedure of law and without even communicating the decision to the petitioner.

2.2 The respondent initiated inquiry for the period from April 1998 to March 2013. Though summons were issued in the year 2013, a fresh Diary Number came to be registered in 2018 and the matter was thereafter taken up for hearing only in 2022.

2.3 On 05.05.2022, despite contest on merits by the petitioner, an order came to be passed mechanically by merely recording that the petitioner is willing to pay the dues if instalment facility is granted, and full damages were levied without assigning adequate reasons. On the same day, another notice was issued for the period April 2014 to 31.03.2022. Upon noticing discrepancies, the period was revised and made from July 2012 to February

2022 and registered as Diary No. 89 of 2022.

2.4 On 06.06.2022, the respondent No.1 passed an order without considering the facts and mitigating circumstances raised by the petitioner. Separate orders under Section 14B of the Act came to be passed on both occasions. As regards Section 70, the petitioner had already raised dispute and requested for instalments and thereafter paid the entire dues under Section 7Q of the Act.

2.5 On 25.11.2022, the petitioner filed an appeal before respondent No.3 through respondent No.1 under Section 14B read with Para 32B of the Employees’ Provident Funds & Miscellaneous Provisions Act and Scheme, seeking waiver/reduction of damages. However, the request remained pending and no decision was taken by respondent No.3 despite several reminders.

2.6 During pendency of the appeal, the respondent No.1 issued notices under Section 8F and attached the bank account of the petitioner on 21.04.2023. Though a reply was submitted by the petitioner on 09.05.2023, the bank account was attached without affording any notice or hearing on 27.07.2023. After intervention by the petitioner and pointing out the pendency of appeal and the ongoing monthly payments of Rs. 5.00 lakh towards Section 7Q dues, the bank account was de-freezed. Ultimately, on 21.02.2024 the entire payment under Section 7Q was completed.

2.7 On 19.06.2024, notice for the period April 2022 to June 2024 was issued. Thereafter, on 29.07.2024, an order was passed in an absolutely mechanical manner without hearing the petitioner and without granting reasonable opportunity by merely recording that one Shri Hitesh Patel appeared and stated that he