Jharkhand High Court
M/S.Telco Transport Co.Associa vs Union Of India & Ors. on 6 April, 2010
Author: Gyan Sudha Misra
Bench: Chief Justice, R.R.Prasad
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND, RANCHI
W.P (L) No. 2773 OF 2006
With
I.A No.960 OF 2010
-----
TELCO Transport Companies Association Vs. Union of India & Ors.
-------
CORAM HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE
HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE R.R.PRASAD
For the Appellant/Petitioner Mr.V.P.Singh, Sr.Advocate
For the Respondent Mr.Kalyan Roy
---------
15/6.4.2010I.A No.960 OF 2010 This is an application for early hearing of this writ petition on the ground that the respondents are suffering financial loss since they are not able to avail the amount deposited towards provident fund which is lying in deposit with the Regional Provident Fund Commissioner, Jamshedpur.
However, we have noticed that the matter initially had been listed before the Single Bench, but thereafter it was referred to the Division Bench by order dated 7.7.06 without assigning any reason as to why it should have been referred to the Division Bench in absence of any conflict of opinion between the two Benches or existence of conflicting judgments which under the rules could have justified referring the matter to the Division Bench. The only reason assigned in the order dated 7.7.06 for referring the matter to the Division Bench is that it involved the issue which required determination as to whether there is relationship of employer and employee for ensuring payment of provident fund under the Employees' Provident Fund & Miscellaneous Provision Fund Act, 1952. The other question, as per the Single Bench, for determination was whether the matter could be remanded back for determination by appellate forum since the dispute is continuing for more than 25-30 years. Under these two circumstance, it was noticed that it was desirable to refer the matter before the Division Bench.
We do not, however, subscribe to the view that it was a fit case for referring the matter straightway to the Division Bench as the matters are referred from Single Bench to the Division Bench, inter alia, on the grounds including the ground that if the petitioner challenges the constitutional validity of an Act or provision of an Act or difference of opinion between the Judges on any issue or judgment or conflicting judgments are cited before the Single Bench which may justify reference of the matter straightway by the Single Bench to the Division Bench. In absence of any of these grounds, it is incumbent upon the Judge taking up the matter to decide the same as per his views.
However, this is merely an application of early hearing of the writ petition and considering the fact that the respondent workmen are suffering financial loss and are not able to avail the amount deposited towards provident fund, the matter is ordered to be listed for hearing on 27th April, 2010, and at that stage it will be open for the Division Bench to consider as to whether the matter has rightly been referred to Division Bench for adjudication of the dispute without the Single Bench having decided the matter and whether the matter could have been referred to the Division Bench in absence of any reason which could justify reference of the matter by the Single Bench straightway to the Division Bench.
This application accordingly is allowed and disposed of.
(Gyan Sudha Misra, C.J) (R.R.Prasad,J) dey