Karnataka High Court
Embassy Public School vs Regional Provident Fund ... on 13 December, 2022
-1-
WP No. 22845 of 2022
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 13TH DAY OF DECEMBER, 2022
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE C.M. POONACHA
WRIT PETITION NO. 22845 OF 2022 (L-PF)
BETWEEN:
1. EMBASSY PUBLIC SCHOOL
UNIT OF COSMOPOLIS EDUCATIONAL TRUST
MAGADI ROAD, BENGALURU
REPRESENTED BY ITS AUTHORIZED
REPRESENTATIVE MR VENKAT
...PETITIONER
(BY SRI. VISHWAS. N.,ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. REGIONAL PROVIDENT FUND COMMISSIONER-II
REGIONAL OFFICE,
BHAVISHYANIDHI BHAVAN
13, RAJARAM MOHAN ROY
BENGALURU-560025
ALSO AT:
NO.570, 26TH CROSS,
RAJARAJESHWARI REGENCY,
OPPOSITE RAJARAJESHWARI TEMPLE,
Digitally BENGALURU - 560098.
signed by
NIRMALADEVI ...RESPONDENT
Location: (BY SMT NANDITA HALDIPUR, ADVOCATE)
HIGH COURT
OF
KARNATAKA
THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 & 227 OF THE
CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO DIRECT THE RESPONDENT TO
RESTRAIN FROM INITIATION OF ACTION OR RECOVERY
PROCEEDINGS/ ENFORCING AND /OR GIVING EFFECT TO THE
ORDER DATED 11.10.2022 BEARING NO.
BG/MRD/30036/PD/515/2022-23/442 PASSED BY THE RESPONDENT
-2-
WP No. 22845 of 2022
HEREIN (ANNEXURE A) U/S 14B OF THE EMPLOYEES PROVIDENT
FUND AND MISCELLANEOUS PROVISIONS ACT, 1952 AND THE
ORDER DATED 11.10.2022 BEARING
NO.BG/MRD/30036/PD/515/2022-23/ PASSED BY THE RESPONDENT
HEREIN (ANNEXURE B) U/S 7Q OF THE EMPLOYEES PROVIDENT
FUND AND MISCELLANEOUS PROVISIONS ACT 1952, UNTIL THE
DISPOSAL OF THE APPEAL FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE
CENTRAL GOVT. INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNAL, BENGALURU.
THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING IN
'B' GROUP, THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
ORDER
1. The above Writ Petition is filed seeking for the following reliefs:
"a. Issue a writ of Mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order or direction, directing the Respondent to restrain from of action/recovery proceedings/enforcing and/or giving effect to the order dated 11.10.2022 bearing No. BG/MRD/30036/PD/515/2022-23/442 passed by the Respondent herein ("Annexure A") under Section 14B of the Employees' Provident Fund and Miscellaneous Provisions Act, 1952; and the order dated 11.10.2022 bearing No. BG/MRD/30036/PD/515/2022-23/ passed by the Respondent herein ("Annexure B") under section 7Q of the Employees' Provident Fund and Miscellaneous Provisions Act, 1952, until the disposal of the appeal filed by the Petitioner before the Central Government Industrial Tribunal, Bengaluru;
b. Pass any other writ, order or directions as further reliefs, this Learned Court may deem fit in the facts and circumstances of the case and in the interest of justice and equity."-3- WP No. 22845 of 2022
2. It is the case of the Petitioner that the determination has been made by Respondent-Authority under Section 7A of the of the Employees Provident Fund and Miscellaneous Provisions Act, 1952 (for short 'the Act') which has been complied with. However, the Respondent vide order dated 11.10.2022 is require the Petitioner to pay a sum of `33,08,395/- under Section 14B of the Act and a sum of `15,88,027/- under Section 7Q of the Act. It is the further case of the Petitioner that the said orders are the subject matter of challenge in appeal that has been filed before the Appellate Tribunal and a copy of the memorandum of appeal is produced as Annexure-C to the Writ Petition which discloses that the said appeal has been filed on 10.11.2022 which is duly acknowledged by the Office of the CGIT/ Labour Court, Bengaluru. It is the further case of the Petitioner that since there is no sitting of the Tribunal, the appeal is not been considered and seeks for the relief sought for in the Writ Petition including the ad-interim relief.
3. Learned counsel for Respondent submits that although the order bearing No. BG/MRD/30036/PD/515/2022-23/442 dated 11.10.2022 (Annexure-A) to the Writ Petition passed under Section 14B of the Act is an appealable one, the order bearing No.BG/MRD/30036/PD/515/2022-23 dated 11.10.2022 (Annexure-B) -4- WP No. 22845 of 2022 to the Writ Petition passed under Section 7Q of the Act is not an appealable one. Further submits that the Petitioner will be required to make a pre-deposit. However, learned counsel for the Petitioner in support of his contention that the order under Section 7Q of the Act is an appealable one relies on the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Arcot Textile MIlls Ltd., Vs. Regional Provident Fund Commissioner1.
4. Having regard to the submissions made, it is expedient that the appeal filed by the Petitioner be considered and including the question as to whether an appeal would be lie under Section 7Q of the Act as Pre-deposit will be required to be made by the Petitioner while challenging the order dated 11.10.2022 passed under Section 7Q of the Act that will be required to be made. The relief sought for by the Petitioner could be granted to a limited extent upto consideration of the interim relief by the Tribunal in the appeal filed by the Petitioner.
5. In view of the aforementioned, the present Writ Petition is disposed off by directing the Respondents not to take any precipitative action pursuant to the order bearing No. 1 (2013) 16 SCC 1.
-5-WP No. 22845 of 2022 BG/MRD/30036/PD/515/2022-23/442 dated 11.10.2022 (Annexure- A) and order bearing No. No.BG/MRD/30036/PD/515/2022-23 dated 11.10.2022 dated 11.10.2022 (Annexure-B) till consideration of the interim relief by the Tribunal in the Appeal filed by the Petitioner.
Sd/-
JUDGE BS -List No.: 1 Sl No.: 59