Back
2022 Supreme(Online)(KER) 13887
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE MURALI PURUSHOTHAMAN FRIDAY, THE 12TH DAY OF AUGUST 2022 / 21ST SRAVANA, 1944 WP(C) NO. 26048 OF 2022 PETITIONER/S:
ALUMINIUM INDUSTRIES LIMITED, SWITCH GEAR DIVISION, KUTTAMPEROOR, MANNAR, ALLEPPEY-689 623, REPRESENTED BY ITS DIRECTOR & COMPANY SECRETARY, SHRI. K. JAYAKUMAR.
BY ADVS.
E.K.NANDAKUMAR (SR.)
M.GOPIKRISHNAN NAMBIAR K.JOHN MATHAI JOSON MANAVALAN KURYAN THOMAS PAULOSE C. ABRAHAM RAJA KANNAN RESPONDENTS:
1 THE REGIONAL PROVIDENT FUND COMMISSIONER EMPLOYEES PROVIDENT FUND ORGANISATION, REGIONAL OFFICE, 36/685 A, BHAVISHYANIDHI BHAVAN, KALOOR, KOCHI-682 017.
2 CENTRAL GOVERNMENT INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL
8TH FLOOR, KERALA STATE HOUSING BOARD BUILDING, PANAMPILLY NAGAR, ERNAKULAM, COCHIN - 682 016.
SRI.SAJEEV KUMAR K.GOPAL – SC THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 12.08.2022, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
JUDGMENT
The petitioner is challenging Exts.P3 and P7 orders.
Ext.P3 is the order passed by the 1st respondent assessing the damages under Section 14B of the Employees Provident Fund and Miscellaneous Provisions Act, 1952 for belated remittance of dues. The amount assessed as damages is Rs.7,53,124/-. Against Ext.P3, the petitioner preferred an appeal before the 2nd respondent Tribunal and the 2nd respondent as per Ext.P7 scaled down the amount assessed in Ext.P3 by 50%.
2. When the writ petition came up for admission today, the learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner is willing to pay the amount as directed by the
2nd respondent in Ext.P7 in equal monthly installments .
3. Heard Sri. Sajeev Kumar K.Gopal, the learned Standing counsel for the 1st respondent and the learned counsel for the petitioner. Notice to the 2nd respondent is dispensed with.
4. In the facts and circumstances of the case and having regard to the impecunious circumstances pleaded by the petitioner, I am of the view that interest of justice would be met if the petitioner is permitted to pay the amount assessed in Ext.P3 and scaled down by the 2nd respondent, in Ext.P7 in equal monthly installments.
5. Accordingly, the petitioner is directed to pay the amount covered by Ext.P7 in 7 equal monthly installments commencing from 1.9.2022. In case the petitioner makes default in paying the installments as aforesaid, the entire amount due from the petitioner pursuant to Ext.P7 can be recovered from the petitioner in accordance with law. To facilitate the petitioner to make the payments as above, all further proceedings pursuant to Ext.P7 shall be kept in abeyance. On the petitioner satisfying the amounts in Ext.P7, the recovery proceedings shall be unenforceable.
The writ petition is disposed of as above.
Sd/-
MURALI PURUSHOTHAMAN JUDGE
APPENDIX OF WP(C) 26048/2022 PETITIONER EXHIBITS Exhibit P1 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER, DATED 12.02.2014 PASSED BY THE BIFR IN CASE NO. 93/1987.
Exhibit P2 TRUE COPY OF THE REPLY DATED 23.09.2019 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE
1ST RESPONDENT.
Exhibit P3 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 11.12.2019 PASSED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT.
Exhibit P4 TRUE COPY OF THE APPEAL PREFERRED BY THE PETITIONER DATED 29.01.2020 BEING APPEAL NO. 17/2020 WITHOUT ANNEXURES BEFORE THE
2ND RESPONDENT.
Exhibit P5 TRUE COPY OF THE REPLY STATEMENT DATED NIL MARCH, 2020 FILED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT IN APPEAL NO. 17/2020.
Exhibit P6 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER OF THE 2ND RESPONDENT DATED 06.01.2020 IN APPEAL NO. 212/2019.
Exhibit P7 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 01.03.2022 IN APPEAL NO. 17/2020 PASSED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT TRIBUNAL.
