Calcutta High Court (Appellete Side)
(Sl 1) Operative Society Limited & Anr vs (S. Banerjee) on 22 June, 2017
Court No. 32 W. P. No. 16298(W) of 2017
22.06.2017 Ganga Action Plan Contract Workers' Co-
(SL 1) operative Society Limited & Anr.
Vs.
(S. Banerjee)
Regional Provident Fund Commissioner, West Bengal &
Ors.
Mr. Soumya Majumder, Ld. Advocate
Mr. Victor Chatterjee, Ld. Advocate
... for the petitioners
Mr. Mihir Kundu, Ld. Advocate
... for the P.F. authorities
Let the affidavit-of-service filed in court today be kept
with the record.
Heard the learned advocates for the parties.
The writ petition should be decided on affidavits. Let
affidavit-in-opposition be filed within four weeks. Let
affidavit-in-reply thereto, if any, be filed within two weeks
thereafter. Let this matter appear under the heading
hearing in the Combined Monthly List of August, 2017
within the first 100 matters under that heading.
I have been informed by Mr. Majumder, the learned
advocate for the petitioners, that the Employees' Provident
Funds Appellate Tribunal is now practically not
functioning inasmuch as there is no Presiding Officer in
that tribunal. The Central Government Industrial Tribunal
which is now dealing with these matters is also not very
regularly functioning.
So far as Section 14B of the Employees' Provident
Funds and Miscellaneous Provisions Act, 1952 is
concerned there is a provision for appeal. The petitioners
are given liberty to file an appeal and in case they find any
difficulty they shall have the liberty to approach this Court
upon notice to the respondents. However, I direct the
respondents authorities not to enforce the order passed under Section 14B of the said Act for a period of four weeks to enable the petitioners to file an appeal and to proceed with the same.
So far as the order under Section 7Q is concerned, I am of the view that the petitioners have been able to make out a prima facie case for the grant of an interim order. The balance of convenience and inconvenience also lies in favour of passing of an interim order inasmuch as the refusal to pass an interim order shall affect the petitioner more than the grant of it is likely to prejudice the respondents. That apart the period of assessment made by the P.F. authorities is required to be more closely examined at the hearing of the writ petition.
Thus there shall be an unconditional stay of the operation of the order under Section 7Q of the said Act for a period of three weeks. The petitioner says that within the total demand raised by the P.F. authorities both under Section 14B as well as 7Q of the said Act a sum of Rs. 5,11,654/- has been deposited by the petitioners. Mr. Majumder cannot specify for liquidation of demand under which provision the said amount has been deposited. For purposes of convenience if 50 per cent. of the deposited sum is taken to have been deposited in liquidation of the demand raised under Section 7Q of the Act the petitioner still will have to pay a little more than Rs. 5 lac 50 thousand. If during the period of unconditional stay of three weeks the petitioners deposit a sum of Rs. 5 lac 50 thousand with the learned Registrar General, High Court, Calcutta the unconditional stay shall continue till the disposal of the writ petition or until further order, which ever is earlier.
If the said sum is deposited, the learned Registrar General, High Court, Calcutta shall invest it in a short- term fixed deposit with any nationalised bank and shall go on renewing the same from time to time until further order.
(Dr. Sambuddha Chakrabarti, J.)