Claims for provident fund dues must be filed promptly within prescribed timelines; belated claims are inadmissible despite statutory priority under insolvency proceedings.

ORDER

Per Coram:

1. The present Application is filed by the Regional Provident Fund Commissioner II, under Section 60 (5) of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 , with the following reliefs:

i. To allow the claim under section 7-A, 14-B and 7-Q of the EPF & MP Act, 1952 of the Applicant, being an amount of’ Rs. 29,68,97,991/- (Rupees Twenty-Nine Crores Sixty-Eight Lakhs Ninety-Seven Thousand Nine Hundred and Ninety-One Only) as per the Letter dated 15.02.2024 filed by the Applicant to the Resolution Professional, and the claim be considered as priority over other dues of the Corporate Debtor and delay if any be condoned;

ii. Direct the Resolution Professional herein to consider the claim of the Applicant in priority as per the provisions of IBC and EPF & MP Act, 1952;

iii. To set aside Annexure A5 communication of the 2nd Respondent dated 03/05/2024 issued to the Applicant, be called;

2. The Brief facts of the case are as follows: -

1. The applicant, EPFO a statutory body constituted under the Miscellaneous Provisions Act, 1952 (hereinafter referred to provisions of Employees’ Provident Fund and as the EPF & MP Act, 1952) submits that the 1^st Respondent Corporate Debtor is an establishment covered under the Provisions of EPF & MP Act, 1952 and by virtue of Section 6, 6A, and 6C of the said Act, read with Paragraph 38 of the Employees’ Provident Fund Scheme, 1952, Paragraph 3 of the Employees’ Pension Scheme, 1995, and Paragraph 8(1) the Corporate Debtor is under the statutory obligation to of the Employees’ Deposit Linked Insurance Scheme, 1976, remit the prescribed contributions in a timely manner, failing which they will be liable to pay damages along with its interest.

2. The Corporate Debtor was admitted into Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process by this Tribunal vide order dated 01.11.2023, pursuant to a Company Petition filed under Section 7 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 . The second Respondent herein was appointed as the Interim Resolution Professional and was subsequently confirmed as the Resolution Professional of the Corporate Debtor, in accordance with the provisions of the Code.

3. Resolution Professional made public announcement on 03.11.2023, invited claims from creditors to submit their claims, with the last date for submission being 14.11.2023.

4. Applicant/EPFO filed their claim of Rs. Rs.29,68,97,991/- in respect of regular dues including dues under Section 14B and 7Q of the EPF& MP Act, 1952, belatedly on 15.02.2024.

5. In response to the said claim, the 2nd Respondent Resolution Professional after scrutiny of the claim, vide email dated 18.04.2023 requested the applicant authority to file a revised claim by citing the following reasons.

a. Claim was filed in an improper form.

b. Applicant has allegedly relied heavily on a Report dated 06.02.2024 prepared by the Enforcement Officer, Vashi, which as per the RP has been prepared on the basis of incomplete/unverified data and assumptions. Further the RP has alleged that several flaws, errors and omissions have crept into the report, which has affected the credibility of the report and the claim amount arrived at on the basis of that report.

6. The applicant vide letter dated 25.04.2024 in response to communicated to the RP that the dues payable to the EPFO are not in the nature of the RP’s email dated 18.04.2023, debts but constitute third-party assets, and hence, filing such claims under Form F is improper. It was further pleaded that treating EPF dues as debts would contravene the provisions of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code as well as directions issued by the EPFO. Accordingly, the Applicant requested the RP to expedite the processing of the submitted claim and to release the amount due to the EPFO at the earliest.

7. The RP vide email dated 03.05.2024 once again requested the applicant to resubmit the claim in Form B along with the necessary supporting documents, for it to be considered. RP further requested the applicant to consider the facts