Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

Jharkhand High Court

Kalu Ram Modi Memorial Vananchal Inter ... vs Recovery Officer Employees Provident ... on 29 June, 2016

Author: Aparesh Kumar Singh

Bench: Aparesh Kumar Singh

                IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
                         W. P. (C) No. 3709 of 2015
                                      ...
            Kalu Ram Modi Memorial Vananchal Inter College, Giridih
            through its Secretary, Giridih              ...     ...Petitioner
                               -V e r s u s-
            1. Recovery Officer, Employees Provident Fund
            Organization, Regional Office, Ranchi
            2. Punjab National Bank
            through its Chief Manager, Giridih                ...     ...Respondents
                                      ...
        CORAM: - HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE APARESH KUMAR SINGH
                                      ...
            For the Petitioners       : - M/s Rajendra Krishna & Amit Sinha, Advs.
            For the Respondents       :- M/s Pratyush Kumar, Adv.,Gautam Rakesh, Adv.
                                      ....

05/29.06.2016

Heard learned counsel for the parties.

Recovery Officer, Employees Provident Fund Organization, Regional Office, Ranchi through his letter dated 17.06.2015, Annexure-8 impugned herein has ordered attachment of bank account of M/s Kalu Modi Memorial Vananchal (Inter College), Tundi Road, Giridih bearing EPF Code No. JH/11119 to recover an amount of Rs. 5,09,986/- towards provident fund dues from the petitioner-college as it is understood that the said defaulting establishment/proprietor/partners are maintaining account with the petitioner. This order has been passed under Section 8F of the Employees Provident Funds and Miscellaneous Provision Act, 1952.

Petitioner has tried to make out a case that it is not liable for the recovery of dues as it does not have any liability towards the Degree College in the same name which admittedly exists in the same premises. Representations have been made thereafter before the Recovery Officer, EPFO, Ranchi, Vide-Annexure-10 and 11.

Certificates leading to recovery are not on record either in the writ petition or in the counter affidavit filed by the respondent no.

Respondent no. 1 in his counter affidavit states that existence of two EPFO Code in the name of Intermediate Section and Degree Section are alloted for smooth functioning. However, Colleges are run by a single Principal and it was statutory duty of the college administration to remit the EPF dues for both the wings. It is also stated that establishment was covered under EPF & MP Act 1952 vide letter dated 09.04.2003 w.e.f. 29.03.2003. Petitioner refused to remit the EPF and allied dues within the stipulated time, therefore, Authority of respondent -EPFO after passing 7A order decided to issue a Revenue Recovery Certificate dated 03.04.2012 for the period March, 2003 to May, 2005 amounting to Rs. 6,45,389/- under Section 7A and 7Q. After taking all measures such an issue of EPF Certificate Proceeding/warrant of Arrest/Bank Account attachment etc. for liquidation of certificate dues only a sum of Rs. 1,39,402/- was recovered from the Establishment till date. Counsel for the respondent no. 1 submits that petitioner is trying to deny its liability on misleading ground as has been noted hereinabove.

However as noted above, Revenue Recovery Certificate by the Assessing Authority are not on record. The impugned letters addressed to the respondent-Bank is issued by the office of Recovery Officer, EPFO, Ranchi.

In absence of Revenue Recovery Certificate, it is not possible for this Court to determine whether the contention of the petitioner that it is not liable for the outstanding dues and that no proceedings were conducted against him is correct or not. Recovery Proceedings are initiated only after proceeding for assessment as prescribed under the Act. Whether petitioner participated in the said proceeding or not is also not clear from the pleadings on record.

In such circumstances, it is felt appropriate that petitioner should approach the respondent no. 1- Recovery Officer, Employees Provident Fund Organization, Regional Office, Ranchi for consideration of his grievances in accordance with law by taking all such available grounds. Needless to say, respondent no. 1- Recovery Officer, Employees Provident Fund Organization, Regional Office, Ranchi would consider the representations in accordance with law and the order passed in assessment proceeding in respect of establishment in question and take a decision thereupon within a reasonable time preferably within a period of 10 weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. Let it be made clear that this Court has not made any comments upon the merit of the case. The writ petition stands disposed of.

Interim order, if any, stands vacated.

I. A. No. 1737 of 2016 also stands disposed of.

(Aparesh Kumar Singh, J.) Kamlesh/