Telangana High Court
M/S.M/S Unique Body Builders vs Emp Provident Fund Appellate Tribunal ... on 17 November, 2022
Author: K. Lakshman
Bench: K. Lakshman
HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE K. LAKSHMAN
WRIT PETITION No.12438 OF 2010
ORAL ORDER:
Heard Mr. P. Shanker Rao Patil, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. G.Venkateshwarlu, learned Standing Counsel appearing for respondent No.2.
2. Perusal of the record would reveal that respondent No.2 had passed order dated 04.11.2003 under Section - 7A of the Employees Provident Fund and Miscellaneous Provisions Act, 1952 (for short 'Act, 1952'), determining an amount of Rs.4,60,648/- towards contributions for the period from 04/1997 to 08/2001. Feeling aggrieved by the said order, the petitioner herein had preferred an appeal vide ATA No.874(1)/2003 under Section 7-I of the Act,1952 before respondent No.1. Vide order dated 08.04.2010, respondent No.1 had dismissed the said appeal filed by the petitioner confirming the order passed by respondent No.2 under Section - 7A of the Act,1952.
3. Perusal of the said order dated 04.11.2003 would reveal that the petitioner herein had participated in the inquiry conducted by respondent No.2 under Section - 7A of the Act, 1952, produced the vouchers, attendance register, wage register and ledgers etc. The same were specifically mentioned in the said order. Respondent No.2 has also 2 KL,J W.P. No.12438 of 2010 specifically mentioned in the said order that the petitioner - employer has paid contributions in respect of regular employees for the period from 08/1999 to 08/2001. Even then, he has assessed the dues from 01.04.1997 to 07/1999 in respect of the regular employees and 04/1997 to 08/2001 in respect of job work charges under Section - 7A of the Act, 1952 from 04/1997 to 08/2001.
4. Vide notice dated 14.05.2003 issued under Section - 7A of the Act, 1952, respondent No.2 had requested the petitioner to produce attendance register from 08/1999 onwards, whereas, it has assessed the aforesaid amount for the period from 04/1997 to 08/2001. The said grounds were specifically raised by the petitioner in the aforesaid statutory appeal before respondent No.1, but there is no consideration of the said aspects in the impugned order by respondent No.1. On the other hand, respondent No.1 has stated that the petitioner herein has not co- operated with respondent No.2 authority during inquiry under Section - 7A of the Act, 1952. The same is factually incorrect and contrary to the findings given by respondent No.2 in the order dated 04.11.2003. Thus, the impugned order dated 08.04.2010 in ATA No.874(1)/2003 passed by respondent No.1 is not on consideration of the grounds raised by the petitioner and also the provisions of the Act, 1952 apart from the record 3 KL,J W.P. No.12438 of 2010 available. It is not a reasoned order. Therefore, on the said ground alone, the impugned order dated 08.04.2010 is liable to be set aside and accordingly the same is set aside.
5. Further, according to the learned counsel, the petitioner had deposited 50% of the disputed amount in compliance of the interim order granted by respondent No.1 in the aforesaid appeal.
6. In view of the aforesaid submission, this Writ Petition is allowed. The matter is remanded back to respondent No.1 with a direction to consider the aforesaid aspects including the specific grounds raised by the petitioner and the material available on record. Since the order under Section - 7A of the Act, 1952 is dated 04.11.2003, the period is of April, 1997 and the impugned order is dated 08.04.2010, respondent No.1 shall dispose of the aforesaid matter as expeditiously as possible, preferably within a period of three (03) months from the date of receipt of copy of this order. However, in the circumstances of the case, there shall be no order as to costs.
As a sequel, the miscellaneous petitions, if any, pending in the Writ Petition shall stand closed.
_________________ K. LAKSHMAN, J 17th November, 2022 Note: Furnish C.C. of order by 22.11.2022.
(B/O.) Mgr