IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS Dated : 19.03.2025 CORAM THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.DHANDAPANI W.P.No.7726 of 2011 and M.P.No.2 of 2011 The Regional Provident Fund Commissioner, Employees Provident Fund Organization, Tamilnadu & Pondicherry States, No.37, Royapettah High Road, Chennai – 600 014. … Petitioner Vs.

1. The Tamilnadu Civil Supplies Corporation Limited, Rep. by its Chairman and Managing Director, No.42, Thambusamy Road, Kilpauk, Chennai 600 010.

2. All India Food & Allied Workers Union, Rep. by its Secretary, Central Office : 7901, Ram Nagar, Naibasti, Paharganj, New Delhi – 55.

3. The Employees Provident Fund Appellate Tribunal, Ministry of Labour & Employment (Government of India), Scopeminar, Core -II, 4th Floor, Lakshmi Nagar, District Centre, Lakshmi Nagar, New Delhi – 110 092. … Respondents Prayer: Writ petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying for the issuance of Writ of Certiorari, calling for the records relating to the proceedings of the 3^rd Respondent dated 25.06.2007, in Ref.No.ATA No.259(13) of 2002, and quash the order passed therein.

For Petitioner : Mr.T.R.Sundaram For Respondents : Mr.Venkatesh Kumar for Mr.Gupta & Ravi for R1 Mr.V.Ajoy Khose for R2 Mr.K.Ramamoorthy for R3

O R D E R

Assailing the order of the 3^rd respondent, in and by which the order passed by the petitioner has been set aside, wherein the petitioner had directed the respective 1^st respondent to pay the contribution towards PF in respect of the allowances for which PF was not deducted and deposited, the present writ petition has been filed.

2. Heard Mr.T.R.Sundaram, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr.Venkatesh Kumar for Mr.Gupta & Ravi, learned counsel for the first Respondent, Mr.V.Ajoy Khose, learned counsel appearing for the second Respondent, Mr.K.Ramamoorthy, learned counsel appearing for the third Respondent.

3. When the matter is taken up for consideration, learned counsel appearing for the 1^st respondent brought to the notice of this Court that similar issue has been raised in a batch of petitions in W.P. Nos.26413/2017, etc. Batch and this Court, vide order dated 04.08.2023 had allowed the writ petitions setting aside the order passed by the original authority. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner fairly concedes with the same.

4. This Court perused the order passed in W.P. Nos.26413/2017, etc.

Batch, wherein, this Court has held as under :-

“25. A conjoint reading of Sections 7-I and 7-L shows that an appeal to the Tribunal could be filed only by the person aggrieved by the order of the authority or the Central Government and it cannot be by an authority, even higher in hierarchy to the authority, who had passed the order in the absence of any authorisation by the Central Government. Further, for the purpose of determination of moneys to be recovered, the inquiry by the authority is deemed to be a judicial proceeding as is passed by a civil court. In effect, the order passed by the authority, is a judicial order passed exercising quasi-judicial power.

26. Further, as evidenced above, sub-section (4) of Section 7-L makes the order passed by the Tribunal a finality, which could not be questioned in any court of law. True it is that the order of the Tribunal can be put in issue before this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution, as this Court exercises extraordinary jurisdiction. However, the only interpretation that could be given harmoniously to sub-section (4) of Section 7-L is that the authority, who had passed the order, being an authority lower in hierarchy to the Tribunal, is bound to accept the order passed by the Tribunal and is estopped from questioning the said order by filing appeal, except where the order passed is without jurisdiction and that too only if the authority has proper authorisation from the Central Government.

27. However, the other party to the lis, viz., the individual, cannot be estopped from taking the same on appeal before a higher judicial forum.