Recovery proceedings are suspended until the Tribunal considers the petitioner’s appeal and stay request following a previous remittance of damages.

JUDGMENT

This writ petition has been filed challenging Exhibit P6 order imposing damages on the petitioner in terms of the provisions contained in Section 14B of the Employees Provident Funds & Miscellaneous Provisions Act 1952 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’) and Exhibit P7 proceedings initiated under Section 8F of the Act for recovery of the amounts determined in terms of Exhibit P6.

2. It is the submission of the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner that pursuant to the order dated 13.03.2025, the petitioner has remitted a sum equivalent to 20% of the amount levied as damages in terms of Exhibit P6. It is submitted that the petitioner has also filed an appeal (along with a petition to condone delay) against Exhibit P6 before the Central Government Industrial Tribunal (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Tribunal) and the same is pending consideration.

3. Learned Standing Counsel appearing for the Provident Fund Department would submit that the petitioner has not obtained any stay from the Tribunal. However, it is not disputed that the amount directed to be paid by this Court by order dated 13.03.2025, amounting to 20% of the amount to be paid as damages in terms of Exhibit P6 has been remitted by the petitioner.

4. Having heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and the learned Standing Counsel appearing for the Provident Fund Department, the writ petition will stand disposed of, directing that the recovery proceedings initiated against the petitioner in terms of the provisions contained in Section 8F of the Act shall remain suspended till the stay petition filed by the petitioner in the appeal against Exhibit P6 is taken up and considered by the Tribunal as the petitioner has already remitted 20% of the amount levied as damages in terms of Exhibit P6.

Writ petition is ordered accordingly.

Sd/-