The authority under Section 14B of the EPF Act has the discretion to levy appropriate damages for delayed contributions based on attending circumstances, and a Tribunal's decision to modify these damages is not subject to interference absent jurisdictional error.

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO CALL FOR RECORD RELATING TO THE IMPUGNED ORDER DATED 27.08.2020 IN EPF NO.240/2017 ON THE FILE OF THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL - CUM-LABOUR COURT AT BANGLAORE, ETC.

THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING IN 'B' GROUP, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:

ORAL ORDER

(PER: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE D K SINGH)

The present writ petition has been filed by Assistant Provident Fund Commissioner, Tumkur, impugning the order dated 27.08.2020 passed by the Central Government Industrial Tribunal-cum-Labour Court (for short 'the CGIT'), at Bangalore in EPF No.240/2017 instituted by the respondent.

2. The Regional Provident Fund Commissioner-II, Tumkur, passed an order on 10.08.2016/16.08.3026, whereby damages of Rs.12,31,621/- was imposed under Section 14B of the Employees Provident Fund and Miscellaneous Provisions Act, 1952 (hereinafter referred to as 'the EPF Act') for belated payment of PF contribution by the respondent/Sri Vidyodaya Law Grade College with respect to its employees for the period from 04.04.2003 to March 2016.

3. The Provident Fund Commissioner has imposed the maximum damages of 100% on the amount of PF contribution under the provisions of Section 14B of the EPF Act. The CGIT in the impugned order has taken note of the fact that the rates as provided in Para 32A of EPF scheme, 1952, stipulates the maximum rate at which damages can be levied and while levying damages under Section 14B of EPF Act, the learned Commissioner would have discretion to impose appropriate quantum of damages having regard to the attending circumstances.

4. The respondent/College had contended that the students' strength in the College had drastically reduced. Further, the University had restricted the fee amount. Donation is now prohibited. The College is a non-profit Institution with service orientation to the society.

5. Considering the aforesaid facts, CGIT has reduced the damages from 100% to 75%.

6. Ms. Vanshika Mathur, learned counsel appearing for Sri Suyog Herele, learned counsel, for the respondent has eloquently supported the order passed by the CGIT.

6. We find no error of law or jurisdiction committed by the CGIT while reducing the damages from 100% to 75%, taking into account the attending circumstances as stated above.

7. We therefore, find no substance in this writ petition, which is why it is dismissed.