Madhya Pradesh High Court
Citizens Cooperative Bank Ltd. vs Asstt.Provident Fund Commissioner on 6 December, 2012
W.P. No.410/2009
(Citizens Co-operative Bank Vs. Asst. Provident Fund Commissioner)
06.12.2012
Shri Ashish Shroti, learned counsel for the
petitioner.
Shri J.K. Pillai, learned counsel for the
respondent.
Heard on the question of admission. The petitioner has filed this petition being aggrieved by order dated 19.09.2008 as well as order dated 24.11.2008 passed by the respondent under Section 7A and 8F of the Employees Provident Fund and Miscellaneous Provisions Act, 1952 (hereinafter referred to as the Act).
It is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner is a Co-operative society and is exempted from the provisions of the Act. It is further stated that the number of employees of the Bank are less than the number stipulated in the Act and therefore, in view of the provisions of Section 16(1)(a) of the Act, the impugned orders passed by the authority be quashed. It is further contended that in the absence of a notification being issued by the Government of India bringing Co-operative Banks within the purview of the operation of the Act, the impugned orders passed by the authority being without jurisdiction, deserve to be quashed.
W.P. No.410/2009(Citizens Co-operative Bank Vs. Asst. Provident Fund Commissioner) The learned counsel for the respondent by way of a preliminary objection submits that the impugned orders passed by the authority are appealable under the provisions of section 7-I of the Act and therefore the writ petition filed by the petitioner is not maintainable, moreso as the issue raised by him would involve decision on disputed questions of fact. It is further stated that the authority even otherwise has passed the orders on the basis of documents and evidence on record and therefore the petition filed by the petitioner deserves to be dismissed.
Having heard the learned counsel for the parties, I am of the considered view that as the availability of an alternative efficacious statutory remedy of an appeal is undisputed and as the issue raised by the petitioner would involve decision in respect of disputed questions of fact, the petition filed by the petitioner deserve to be disposed of with liberty to the petitioner to avail the alternative remedy of an appeal.
In view of the aforesaid, the petition filed by the petitioner is accordingly disposed of with liberty to the petitioner to assail the impugned orders by taking up appropriate proceedings under the Act before the appropriate forum in accordance W.P. No.410/2009 (Citizens Co-operative Bank Vs. Asst. Provident Fund Commissioner) with law.
It is further directed that in case the petitioner files such an appeal alongwith a copy of the order passed today and a copy of the petition within two months, the appellate authority shall consider and decide the same on merits and shall not dismiss the same only on the ground of limitation.
It is further directed that till orders are passed by the appellate authority on the application for interim relief filed by the petitioner, the interim relief granted by this court staying the operation of the impugned orders shall continue to remain in force. The aforesaid directions shall however not effect the requirements of pre deposit etc. as provided in the Act.
With the aforesaid directions, the petition filed by the petitioner stands disposed of.
C.C. as per rules.
(R.S. Jha) Judge gn