THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE NAGESH BHEEMAPAKA WRIT PETITION No.1832 OF 2025

ORDER:

The present writ petition is filed challenging the Order dated

22.08.2024 passed by Respondent No.2 – Central Government Industrial Tribunal – cum - Labour Court at Hyderabad in E.P.F.

Appeal No.30 of 2022.

2. Heard Mr. M.P.Kashyap, learned counsel for the petitioners, and Sri Janardhan Reddy, learned counsel for Respondent No.1.

Perused the record.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that M/s Potti Sreeramulu Telugu University was brought under the Employees’ Provident Funds & Miscellaneous Provisions Act, 1952 w.e.f. 01.10.1988, as it employed more than 19 workers. The University failed to comply with PF, Pension, and Insurance contributions, leading to a Section 7A inquiry initiated in January 2019, with multiple opportunities for hearing and representation. The 7A Authority concluded the inquiry and determined dues for the period 10/1988 to 02/2019 by Order dated 18.06.2021. The University appealed to the Central Government Industrial Tribunal (CGIT), which, in its order dated 22.08.2024, set aside the 7A order and remanded the matter back to the EPF Authority for fresh determination of dues. The present Writ Petition challenges the CGIT order.

4. Learned counsel for the respondents submits that the Petitioner challenged the CGIT Hyderabad order dated 22.08.2024 in EPF Appeal No.30/2022, which remanded the matter to the 7A EPF Authority to conduct a fresh enquiry and identify eligible beneficiaries, as the original 7A order assessing Rs. 3,00,87,373/- lacked a list of employees. Respondent No.1, a government-funded university promoting Telugu culture, has been implementing EPF provisions since 1.10.2019 and had already deposited 30% of the assessed dues. It is contended that the writ petition is not maintainable, citing legal precedents that EPF contributions must be determined only for identifiable employees. Compliance with a proper 7A enquiry is necessary to ensure correct disbursement and avoid audit objections. The Respondent emphasizes its willingness to pay the remaining dues once beneficiaries are identified, asserts that the petition is time-barred, and seeks dismissal, maintaining that the CGIT order is reasoned, balanced, and adjudicated on merits.

5. Considering the submissions of both learned counsel and perusal of the record, it is evident that the CGIT did not adequately consider the University’s continuous compliance efforts and the exceptional circumstances relating to record- keeping and employee identification over a long period. It is necessary in the interest of justice to allow the writ petition and direct a fresh determination of dues while safeguarding the rights of all eligible employees.

6. Accordingly, the writ petition is disposed of. The impugned CGIT order dated 22.08.2024 is set aside, and the matter is remanded to Respondent No.2 for fresh adjudication of EPF dues, ensuring all eligible employees are correctly identified and dues properly calculated and disbursed. The said exercise shall be completed within six weeks from receipt of a copy of this order. No costs.

Miscellaneous petitions, if any, pending, shall stand closed.

___________________________ NAGESH BHEEMAPAKA,J Date:14.10.2025 dgr