Moratorium under IBC Section 14 prohibits EPF quasi-judicial assessments post-CIRP; delayed claims post-CoC resolution plan approval inadmissible.

ORDER

1. The present application has been filed by the Regional Provident Fund Commissioner- II, under Section 60(5) of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016, read with Rule 11 of the National Company Law Tribunal Rules, 2016, with the following prayers: -

(a) To Allow the claim under 7-A, 14-B and 7-Q of the EPF & MP Act, 1952 of the Applicant, being an amount of Rs.3,15,17,942/-(Rupees 3 crore Fifteen Lakhs Seventeen Thousand Nine Hundred and Forty-Two Only) as per the Letter dated 22/08/2025 filed by the Applicant to the 2nd Respondent Resolution Professional, and the claim be considered as priority over other dues of the Corporate Debtor and delay if any be condoned;

(b) Direct the Resolution Professional herein to consider the claim of the Applicant in priority as per the provision of IBC and EPF & MP Act, 1952;

(c) To set Aside Annexure A 3 communication of the 2nd Respondent dated 23/08/2025 issued to the Applicant, be called (d) To condone the delay in filing claim before the 2nd Respondent.

(e) Such other and further reliefs as this Hon'ble Court deem fit and proper; Brief facts of the case

2. The Applicant is a statutory authority constituted under the Employees’ Provident Funds and Miscellaneous Provisions Act, 1952. The Respondent No.1 is the Corporate Debtor, presently undergoing Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process, and is an establishment covered under the EPF & MP Act bearing Establishment Code No. TH/VSH/22306/A. In terms of Sections 6, 6A and 6C of the EPF & MP Act read with Paragraph 38 of the Employees’ Provident Fund Scheme, 1952, Paragraph 3 of the Employees’ Pension Scheme, 1995, and Paragraph 8(1) of the Employees’ Deposit Linked Insurance Scheme, 1976, the employer is statutorily mandated to remit provident fund, pension and insurance contributions within the prescribed time. Any delay or default in remittance attracts statutory liability for payment of interest and damages in accordance with the provisions of the Act and the Schemes framed thereunder.

3. The Applicant stated that the CIRP proceedings under Section 7 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016, were initiated against the Corporate Debtor/ Respondent No.1 in respect of debt and default qua one Ayyappan Nair Raghavan Pillai. This Adjudicating Authority, vide Order dated 27.09.2024, passed in CP(IBC)/22/KOB/2024, admitted the Corporate Debtor into the CIRP and appointed an Interim Resolution Professional, pursuant to which the Respondent No.2 was subsequently appointed as the Resolution Professional.

4. It is stated that the Applicant became aware of the CIRP proceedings belatedly and, upon such knowledge, filed a comprehensive claim before the Respondent no.2/Resolution Professional on 22.08.2024 for a sum of Rs. 3,15,17,942/- (Rupees Three Crore Fifteen Lakh Seventeen Thousand Nine Hundred and Forty- Two only) towards statutory contributions payable to employees, including dues under Sections 14B and 7Q of the EPF & MP Act.

5. It is stated that on 23.08.2025, the Respondent No.2/Resolution Professional rejected the Applicant’s claim on the grounds that it was not filed in the prescribed form under the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 and the CIRP Regulations, that it was filed with a delay of 329 days from the commencement of CIRP beyond the stipulated period, and that it was submitted after receipt of the resolution plan when the process of receipt, verification and collatio