BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT

DATED : 04.11.2025

CORAM :

THE HON`BLE MR.JUSTICE B.PUGALENDHI

and WMP.(MD)No.602 of 2021

The Regional Provident Fund Commissioner,

Office of the Regional Provident Fund Commissioner,

P.B.No.588, Sree Complex, ‘D’ Block,

No.18, Madurai Road, Tiruchirappalli.

... Petitioner

Vs.

1.The Presiding Officer,

Employees’ Provident Fund Appellate Tribunal,

Scope Minor, Core II, 4th Floor,

Laxmi Nagar District Centre,

Laxmi Nagar, New Delhi.

2.M/s.Cethar Ltd.,

No.4, Dindigul Road, Uram,

Rayar Garden, Trichy-625 001,

Rep. through its Joint Vice President.

3.Mr.Venkataramanarao Nagarajan, Liquidator for M/s Cethar Limited,

New No.29, Kavarai Street, West Mambalam,

Chennai, Tamil Nadu 600 033.

... Respondents

(R3 is impleaded order dated 01.09.2025 in WMP.(MD)No.14648 Prayer : Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying for the issuance of Writ of Certiorari, to call for the records relating to the order of the first respondent in ATA.No.496 (13) 2014 dated 13.08.2014 and quash the same as unconstitutional and illegal.

For Petitioner : Mr.N.Dilipkumar For R2 & R3 : Mr.D.Srinivasa Ragavan, Legal Aid Counsel.

ORDER

The provident fund authority has preferred this writ petition as against the order passed by the Tribunal in ATA.No.496 (13)

2014 dated 13.08.2014.

2.The above said appeal has been preferred by the second respondent as against the damages levied by the authority under Section 14B of the Employees' Provident Funds and Miscellaneous Provisions Act, 1952 [hereinafter referred as ‘the Act’] and interest levied under Section 7Q of the Act. The second respondent is covered under the Act and has been registered with code number TN/22237. They have not paid the contribution for the period 2010 to 2013, for which a proceedings was initiated by the petitioner/ authority under Section 14B of the Act and damages were levied by order dated 22.05.2014 as Rs.84,68,246/- and interest was determined under Section 7Q of the Act as Rs. 48,49,277/- for the belated payment. This order was challenged by the second respondent by way of appeal before the EPF appellate tribunal in ATA.No.496 (13) 2014 and the same was allowed by the tribunal by its order dated 13.08.2014. Challenging the same, the petitioner /authority has preferred the present writ petition.

3.The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner/authority submits that the second respondent company was in existence from the year 1977, having several establishments in six locations, such as, windmills in two locations, guest house, vacant lands at various locations and four subsidiary companies. However, the second respondent has failed to pay the contribution towards its employees. According to the learned counsel for the petitioner, the second respondent has failed to pay contribution for the following periods:-

● from October 1987 to November 1989, ● from March 1997 to June 1997, ● from December 1997 to March 1998, ● from June 1998 to September 1998, ● from October 1998 to February 1999, ● from March 1999 to October 1999 and ● from September 2014 to June 2015.

For these belated payment, proceedings were initiated as against the second respondent. Even thereafter, the second respondent has failed to pay the contribution for the subject period from March 2010 to September 2013.

4.The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that whenever there is a delay in payment of contribution, interest has to be levied as per statute under Section 7Q of the Act. The Act also provides for damages under Section 14B in order to avoid these type of delayed payment of EPF contribution. The amount was also determined as per the scheme provided under the Act and there is no reasons to interfere with orders passed by the authority. However, the appellate authority has set aside the order passed by the petitioner/authority that there is no mens rea and the actus reus for the second respondent to commit this default. Further, the learned counsel for the EPF authorit